- Email: [email protected]
The role of a non-profit organisation-run public bicycle-sharing programme: the case of Kitakyushu City, Japan
Journal of Transport Geography xxx (2013) xxx–xxx
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Transport Geography journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jtrangeo
The role of a non-profit organisation-run public bicycle-sharing programme: the case of Kitakyushu City, Japan Hiroki Nakamura a,⇑, Naoya Abe b,1 a b
Research Institute for East Asia Environments, Kyushu University, W2-1023, 744, Motooka, Nishi-ku, Fukuoka 819-0395, Japan Department of International Development Engineering, Tokyo Institute of Technology, 2-12-1-I4-4, O-okayama, Meguro-ku, Tokyo 152-8550, Japan
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Keywords: Bicycle-sharing Japan Non-profit organisation Management
a b s t r a c t Public bicycle-sharing programmes (PBSPs) are experiencing enormous growth as an increasing number of cities worldwide are adopting the scheme. PBSPs are managed and operated by the private sector; by local community groups, including non-profit organisations (NPOs); and by local governments. In many Japanese cities where private bicycle sharing is high, the scale of PBSPs is relatively small, leading to challenges such as difficulty in securing funding and appointing operators. This paper proposes that NPOs may have the capacity to operate and effectively manage PBSPs in conjunction with other non-profit activities to promote community development. Using a case study approach and implementing a user perception survey, this study examines the experience of a small-scale, NPO-run PBSP in Kitakyushu City, Japan. Findings show that NPO management and operation added value to the PBSP. In addition, some users were interested in the PBSP beyond its role as a means of transport. These users tend to engage in local activities more frequently than other users. Finally, almost all of the users were satisfied with the bicycle-sharing service, regardless of their reasons for using the programme. The insights gained from these results may help improve small-scale PBSP implementation, policy, and planning, both in Japan and beyond. Crown Copyright Ó 2013 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction Public bicycle-sharing programmes (PBSPs) have experienced enormous growth as more and more cities adopt bicycle sharing worldwide (Shaheen et al., 2010; Midgley, 2009). These projects have adopted various management models. In addition to local governments and transport business operators, non-profit organisations (NPOs) and private companies oversee these projects and manage public transport to develop the local community (Beroud and Anaya, 2012). The Paris PBSP is a large-scale model operated by an advertising company; it has attracted significant attention and has also been widely researched (Nadal, 2008). In comparison, pilot programmes in Japan tend to be smaller in scale (Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT), 2010). Early evidence suggests that some larger programmes (those involving 50 or more stations) have had more government involvement, while small to medium programmes (2–50 stations) tend to be operated by NPOs (United States Department of Transportation (USDOT), 2012). However, to
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +81 92 802 2566; fax: +81 92 802 2564. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (H. Nakamura), nabe@ide. titech.ac.jp (N. Abe). 1 Tel./fax: +81 3 5734 3797.
the authors’ knowledge, few studies have examined the role of local NPOs in the operation of small-scale PBSPs. To the authors’ knowledge, the few studies that have examined NPOs as operators (e.g., Beroud and Anaya, 2012) do so in a general way. This paper advances the existing literature by investigating the extent to which an NPO-run scheme can be a viable governance model in PBSP implementation. Furthermore, the analysis of user perceptions in our case study city – Kitakyushu City in Japan, where the scale of the PBSP is relatively small – shows that a smart and skilful management system benefits the local area. Insights provided by this study may help improve the planning and implementation of small-scale PBSPs in Japan and elsewhere.
2. Review of past studies 2.1. Non-profit organisations as public bicycle-sharing operators PBSPs have been introduced in a number of urban centres, including Paris, London, Washington, DC, and Montreal. Shaheen et al. (2010) discussed four generations of PBSPs, including: (1) white bikes, or free-bike systems; (2) coin-deposit systems; (3) IT-based systems; and (4) demand-responsive, multimodal systems. A fourth generation PBSP, according to DeMaio (2009) and Shaheen et al. (2010), would be characterised by system
0966-6923/$ - see front matter Crown Copyright Ó 2013 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.11.009
Please cite this article in press as: Nakamura, H., Abe, N. The role of a non-profit organisation-run public bicycle-sharing programme: the case of Kitakyushu City, Japan. J. Transp. Geogr. (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.11.009
2
H. Nakamura, N. Abe / Journal of Transport Geography xxx (2013) xxx–xxx
integration (e.g. transit integration, smart card integration with other transport modes), technological innovations (e.g. Radio Frequency Identification) and responsive design (e.g. surveillance system in docking stations). To date, the most prominent funding sources for PBSPs have been municipalities and advertising partnerships. Advertising companies operate PBSPs in exchange for the right to advertise on city streets and billboards (e.g. Brisbane’s CityCycle). Beroud and Anaya (2012) cited two key governance models in the provision and operation of PBSPs: market initiatives (private bodies) and authority initiatives (public bodies). Specific examples include governments, quasi-governmental transport agencies, NPOs, advertising companies, and for-profit companies (DeMaio, 2009). The four main characteristics of a non-profit model, as discussed in studies by the City of Minneapolis (2008), DeMaio (2009), USDOT (2012) and Shaheen et al. (2012), are: 1. An NPO can leverage the popularity of bicycle sharing to accomplish important social benefits, including: a. Education about cyclist safety and the potential to reduce car dependency. b. Coordination with employer wellness projects to create incentives for healthy lifestyles. c. Advocacy for bicycleand pedestrian-friendly infrastructure. 2. The non-profit model may help raise awareness of bicycling as an additional and complementary mode with other bicycle-related non-profit activities. 3. The non-profit model benefits the locality. An NPO can obtain the capital needed for initial equipment purchase through public subsidies and private sponsorship. This model is well positioned to operate the system at low cost by using local contractors and employees, and by obtaining cash and in-kind sponsorship. 4. The non-profit mission is aligned with the interests of public users as well as economic concerns. Although the mission of NPOs is not to make a profit, they aim to manage the projects efficiently and to satisfy their customers. Based on the above references, this paper hypothesises that important contributing factors to effectively managing small-scale non-profit PBSPs include an operator’s relationship with the local government and residents, as well as the spatial effective connection between the city centre, residences, public facilities and public transit stations. Moreover, small-scale schemes must be flexible enough to respond to the needs of potential users in the local community. Furthermore, the non-profit model must not only provide public transport but also take the initiative to encourage community involvement and have been actively involved in community activities to meet various social objectives. In general, while the above studies suggest the key attributes and roles of NPOs as operators, no case studies of small-scale PBSPs in Japan have used primary data (e.g. using questionnaire surveys) to comprehensively examine an NPO-operated PBSP. Therefore, this study looks at the non-profit model in a Japanese context. The next section reviews relevant literature on current PBSPs in Japan.
3. Public bicycle-sharing projects and users in Japan In Japan, PBSPs and pilot projects have been carried out in many cities and areas, such as Kitakyushu City, Toyama City, Setagaya Ward (Tokyo), Yokohama City, Sapporo City, Hiroshima City, Nagoya City, Hanshin Area, Chigasaki City, Okayama City, Sendai City, and Kanazawa City. Studies of those projects are described
in Hasegawa (2002), Hikawa (2011), Ishihara (2011), Kamihara (2010), Kuromizu (2010), Makino et al. (2009), Mitamura et al. (2009), Nakajima et al. (2007), Nakamura (2012), Sahashi (2010), and Sawa et al. (2010). In addition, MLIT (2010) summarised these projects and their characteristics, as shown in Table 1 and Fig. 1. The pilot projects in Japan typically employ about 50–300 bicycles. This is smaller in scale than the approximately 20,000 bicycles used in Paris and the 6000 bicycles used in London. The PBSP per bicycle per day utilisation rate ranged from a low of 0.22 to a high of almost 65.96. Although the purposes of usage varied across different cities or areas, bicycles were generally used for sightseeing, except in Sendai and Nagoya, where the bicycles were used primarily for shopping. It is interesting to note that bicycles were rarely used for business purposes. Additionally, Nagoya’s relatively large-scale pilot project allowed for special features to be incorporated into the system, such as high-density bicycle access docking stations in vacant buildings of local shopping areas, which helped change users’ choice of transport mode. As shown in Fig. 1, while many users shifted from using public transport, such as buses and trains, to PBSPs, fewer private car users shifted to bicycles. 3. The Kitakyushu non-profit organisation-run public bicyclesharing project This study focuses on a PBSP in Kitakyushu, a government-designated city located at the northeast tip of Fukuoka prefecture in the Kyushu region. Kitakyushu is an international city of more than 970,000 people that borders the main island of Japan. The city has seven wards, with Kokura station in Kokura-kita ward serving as the main rail hub of the city. The Kitakyushu public bicycle-sharing service is mainly accessible in the Kokura station area, although there is another service area near Yahata station in Yahata-higashi ward (Fig. 2). In this section, the authors summarise the characteristics of the cooperation and the spatial connections between the non-profit operator of the PBSP in Kitakyushu City, the local administration, and private companies, as well as the characteristics of the project’s operation system. 3.1. Cooperation and diversification of activities for sustainable operation Since 2003, the NPO that operates the Kitakyushu PBSP has managed a sightseeing bicycle-rental business using electric-assisted bicycles, parking lots around urban stations, and car-sharing businesses in Kitakyushu City Traffic Park, which operates traffic education projects. Through these businesses, the organisation has gained experience in co-operating with the municipal government. The PBSP was launched following repeated discussions with the municipal government to address various bicycle-related problems in the area. The NPO carried out the facility construction and has been responsible for maintenance and operations since. However, it is important to note that the organisation was supported by the municipal and national governments at many points. For example, national government provided initial capital in the form of subsidies, while the Kitakyushu municipal government assisted with promotional activities. Public officers now use the service for their official business. The NPO’s purpose is to provide various community benefits and help improve the quality of life of the general public. In addition, as the organisation attaches importance to continuity in managing and operating the project, and to connecting the city spatially and politically, it reinvests part of the profits from its related businesses back into the PBSP. The complementary aims of some such related businesses include: to counteract illegal bicycle
Please cite this article in press as: Nakamura, H., Abe, N. The role of a non-profit organisation-run public bicycle-sharing programme: the case of Kitakyushu City, Japan. J. Transp. Geogr. (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.11.009
3
H. Nakamura, N. Abe / Journal of Transport Geography xxx (2013) xxx–xxx Table 1 Overview of bicycle-sharing pilot projects in Japan. Source: Created by the authors using data from MLIT (2010).
Project duration Number of docking stations Number of bicycles Average daily usage Daily utilisation rates per bicycle
Hiroshima
Nagoya
Chigasaki
Okayama
Sendai
Kanazawa
November–December 2009 11
October–December 2009 30
December 2009– February 2010 19
September 2011– March 2012 7
November 2010 10
August–October 2009 10
110 74.3 0.68
300 1647 5.49
51 – –
100 22 0.22
100 596.1 5.96
100 354.5 3.54
Changes in users’ transport modes
Uses of shared bicycles 0%
50%
0%
100%
50%
membership card system, in which 10% of the usage fee is returned to these users as eco points.
100%
Hiroshima (n = 62)
3.2. Operating staff of the Kitakyushu project
Nagoya (n = 1457) Chigasaki (n = 64)
In addition to full-time staff members engaged in strategy drafting, office work, and general affairs, the NPO employs full-time traffic safety guides and aged citizens as part-time traffic safety instructors. These part-time staff members, who know the local people and geography well, communicate with bicycle users, patrol the project’s parking lots, perform traffic safety guidance, and maintain the facilities and equipment, in addition to providing immediate response in emergencies. Furthermore, they react flexibly to users. For example, staff members explain how to use the system, and provide local information (such as sightseeing destinations) to users. Regardless of their employment status (part-time or full-time), staff members actively participate in events hosted by the local municipality related to regional development, environmental beautification, and other activities. This operating framework, which involves close staff engagement with the management, users, and the local community, is a major characteristic of the Kitakyushu PBSP.
Okayama (n = 183) Sendai (n = 2583) Kanazawa (n = 21522) Commuting Business use Sightseeing
Car Motorcycle Bicycle No travel
Walk Bus Train Taxi
Shopping Others
Fig. 1. Uses of shared bicycles and changes in users’ transport modes. Source: Created by the authors using data from MLIT (2010).
parking by organising bicycle parking lots (hardware-related measure); traffic safety education and improvement regarding the bicycle-use environment (software-related measure); and rental of electric bicycles for sightseeing. In addition, the organisation contributes to local community improvement. For example, it accepts student volunteers and interns from the region, employs elderly people as traffic safety instructors, actively participates in community-building activities using the PBSP, and develops the community using the ‘eco point’ (local community currency)
Japan
3.3. System and spatial management strategy In Kitakyushu City, there are 116 electric-assisted bicycles accessible at 10 docking stations, 7 of which are located in the
Bicycle sharing system
Kitakyushu City
Kitakyushu City
Kokura Station Yahata Station
Tokyo
Rail line
10 km
Spatial conceptaround Kokura Station Kokura
Rail line
Bicycle-sharing docking station Bicycle parking lot Bus stop Bus main route Open space Public facility City center (shopping area)
River
Monorailline
Fig. 2. Maps and figures of interest in the area.
Please cite this article in press as: Nakamura, H., Abe, N. The role of a non-profit organisation-run public bicycle-sharing programme: the case of Kitakyushu City, Japan. J. Transp. Geogr. (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.11.009
4
H. Nakamura, N. Abe / Journal of Transport Geography xxx (2013) xxx–xxx
downtown district near Kokura station. Only electric-assisted bicycles are used for the project. The keys and batteries for the electric bicycles are managed using a system of touch-panel lockers (Fig. 2). As the docking stations downtown are expected to be used daily by local residents, including public officers, they are installed in front of public transport stations and public facilities. The longest distance between docking stations is 2.2 km, so that users can move from one docking station to the next closest one within 10 min or so. As mentioned above, the PBSP is a part of other bicycle-use promotion and community-building projects run by the NPO through public–private partnerships. The NPO’s PBSP management strategy has the following goals: (1) promote active and appropriate private bicycle use; (2) monitor and manage private bicycle parking areas to reduce the incidence of illegally parked bicycles around public transport stations and other public places; and (3) develop and introduce a public electric bicycle-sharing project that integrates private bicycle parking area management and car-sharing systems. Some of the docking stations were first introduced within the mixed use city centre, which accommodated a number of land uses, including the retail shopping district, public facilities, open spaces, all of which were physically integrated by a train station hub. The spatial arrangement of the public bicycle-sharing service is illustrated in Fig. 2. The vertical line represents the train line and the horizontal line represents the monorail line; near the intersection of these lines is the city centre. Although the scale of the PBSP is relatively small, the introduction of the project has proved to be very effective in stimulating the area. Before the introduction of the PBSP, open spaces and public facilities were not integrated with the city centre or with public transport, and the entire area was difficult to drive or park in, making it better suited to cycling. The average monthly PBSP usage is displayed in Fig. 3. The use of the public bicycle-sharing service is apparently facilitating connections between the city centre (shopping area), public facilities, and hub train stations, with the strongest connections observed between the train stations and public facilities through the open space and the city centre. The motivations and purposes underlying this usage will be analysed via an investigation of user characteristics in Section 4. 3.4. Users of the Kitakyushu project Users must register to participate in the Kitakyushu project. The monthly base membership charge is 525 yen (5.35 USD as of 21 October 2013). The fee is 105 yen (1.07 USD as of 21 October 2013) per hour for actual usage, and the maximum charge per day is 525 yen. In addition to the hourly charge, users can choose
a monthly payment system. By paying 5250 yen (53.5 USD as of 21 October 2013), they can use the service as many times as they like during a month. The average monthly wage for Kitakyushu city officers is around 400,000 yen (4075 USD as of 21 October 2013), so the monthly cost for the service is less than 1.5% of the Kitakyushu City officers’ monthly income. Additionally, for unregistered users, such as tourists or people on temporary business, the project offers a one-day charge of 500 yen (5.09 USD as of 21 October 2013). If a user wants to use both the car- and bicycle-sharing services, they must pay the relevant initiation fees for both programmes. The payment method is integrated so that both can be easily used. Unlike some PBSPs, the Kitakyushu programme has no gratis option, given the minimum bus or monorail fare is 100 yen (1.02 USD as of 21 October 2013) and the public bicyclesharing service is being promoted as a complementary form of public transport. Because of this, average monthly usage may be less than if a free option were offered, or if registered membership was not a general requirement. As of 31 December 2011, the PBSP reached 18 registered corporate members (comprising 604 people) and 261 individual registered members, demonstrating an upward trend in membership (Fig. 4). The daily mean usage varies by month. Total daily usage generally ranged between 50 and 80 rides. Daily utilisation rates per bicycle were 0.43–0.69. These results are similar to those of the Hiroshima City project, which is similar in size to the Kitakyushu project (Table 1). Included in the total corporate member count is Kitakyushu municipal government officers, who use the public bicycles for their official business. To promote low-carbon communities, public officers took the initiative to use the PBSP voluntarily since September 2010. The number of registered members was 366 persons in total, in 38 sections, accounting for approximately 40% of total users. 4. User characteristics of the Kitakyushu project In this section, we analyse PBSP user characteristics based on the results of questionnaire surveys that were conducted in Kitakyushu City. In such a small-scale and unique project run by an NPO, understanding user relationships and characteristics is crucial to sustainable management. Questionnaires were distributed to all users (both registered members and one-day users) of the PBSP on 12 January 2010 (collection deadline: 24 January 2010). Of the 300 questionnaires distributed, 117 completed survey forms were collected (a 39% response rate), of which about were valid. Men accounted for 60% of registered members (33% were public officers and 27% others) and 12% of one-day users. Women accounted for 20% of registered members (12% public officers and 8% others) and 8% of one-day users.
Rail line
4.1. Grouping users by participation incentive Monorail line
Amount of average monthly usage 1-50 151-300 51-150 River
Fig. 3. The spatial amount of average monthly usage. Source: Created by the authors using NPO data.
To understand users’ participation incentives, we asked the respondents to rate the 27 statements shown in Table 2 using a Likert scale for each item according to their participation incentives. According to the average value scores shown in Table 2, ‘To ride an electric-assisted bicycle’ is the highest participation incentive on average. The second, third, and fourth highest are ‘To feel local nature and landscape during the bicycle ride’, ‘To ride a bicycle more frequently’, and ‘To get refreshed’, in turn. For the participation incentive ‘There is no alternative transport’, the average value score is very low at 2.32. Before using the public bicycle-sharing service, respondents had used other means of transport, so few people felt strongly that there was no other means available.
Please cite this article in press as: Nakamura, H., Abe, N. The role of a non-profit organisation-run public bicycle-sharing programme: the case of Kitakyushu City, Japan. J. Transp. Geogr. (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.11.009
H. Nakamura, N. Abe / Journal of Transport Geography xxx (2013) xxx–xxx (Number of members)
5
(Amount of average daily usage)
(Year)
Fig. 4. Kitakyushu project membership and daily usage rates. Source: Created by the authors using NPO data.
With regard to bicycles and parking lots, the average score of ‘Car parking is not convenient’ is high at 3.42, while that of ‘Bicycle parking is not convenient’ is low at 2.48. Relatively few users felt that bicycle parking was inconvenient before using the public bicycle-sharing service. For the incentive ‘To support and sympathise with the NPO’, the average score is high at 3.53. Therefore, some users assented to the NPO’s mission and wanted to actively support and sympathise with it. It is difficult to generalise users’ tendencies or participation incentives using these simple results. To allow us to determine the overall characteristics of the various participation incentives from some of the principal components, we then analysed the results using a principal component analysis (PCA). PCA is a useful method to find optimal ways of combining variables into a small number of subsets. The analysis was performed using StataÒ 11.1 data analysis software (Stata, 2009). By calculating the weighted mean average from the PCA, we were able to identify overall characteristics. According to Stata, PCA is a statistical technique used for data reduction. The leading eigenvectors from the eigen-decomposition of the correlation or covariance matrix of the variables describe a series of uncorrelated linear combinations of the variables that contain most of the variance. In addition to data reduction, the eigenvectors from a PCA are often inspected to learn more about the underlying structure of the data (Stata, 2009). An orthogonal transformation was used to convert a set of observations of possibly correlated variables into a set of values of uncorrelated variables. The uncorrelated variables are called principal components (PCs). The number of PCs is less than or equal to the number of original variables. The first PC has the highest variance. PCA results are usually discussed in terms of component scores and loadings. The former are the transformed variable values corresponding to a particular case in the data, and the latter are the weights by which each standardised original variable should be multiplied to get the component score (Shaw, 2003). PCA was applied to the 27 questions (i.e. variables) with five-level weighting for evaluations to determine the PCs, as shown in Table 2. In this section, we review PCs I to IV, with cumulative contribution ratios above 50%. The contribution ratios for these components were 30.7%, 9.4%, 7.4%, and 5.5%, respectively. Details of the four PCs are as follows: PC I: The first component showed wide interest in social and local issues, such as the environment, health, local community development, renewable energy, and other NPO activities. PC II: The second component showed an inclination toward using shared bicycles in order to use bicycles more frequently to go shopping, experience local nature, and get refreshed.
PC III: The third component showed the necessity of using shared bicycles because of a lack of alternative modes of transport and the inconvenience of parking automobiles. PC IV: The fourth component showed no specific, strong reasons for using shared bicycles but some curiosity about using them. After determining the four PCs based on 27 questions, the respondents were categorised into two groups by cluster analysis based on the scores of the four PCs. Cluster analysis stopping rules were used to determine the number of clusters, and analysis was performed using the Stata (2009) software package. The basic concept of cluster analysis is to group similar objects into categories in a way that the degree of association between two objects is maximal if they belong to the same group, and minimal otherwise. The average component score of Group 1 (n = 31) is 2.83, 0.45, 0.07, and 0.33, and Group 2 (n = 69) is 1.27, 0.20, 0.03, and 0.15 in components I, II, III, and IV, respectively. Following this analysis, each group was named as follows: Group 1: Users with general interest in social and local issues (General Interest Group). Group 2: Users aiming to actively incorporate bicycles into their lives (Active Incorporator Group). Users in the General Interest Group had positive component I scores. Component I, as seen in Table 2, included various reasons for using the public bicycle-sharing service. The reasons were not only transport related, such as ‘To save transport expenses’, ‘To ride a bicycle more frequently’, ‘To ride an electric-assisted bicycle’, and ‘To join a car-sharing project as well’, but also included wanting to engage in environmentally friendly and healthy activities, join and exchange information about local activities, and support local organisations and government. The latter reasons were related to community-building activities, and the General Interest Group users were interested in community building through the PBSP to some extent. In contrast, users in the Active Incorporator Group had negative component I scores and positive component II scores. As mentioned earlier, principal component II indicates an inclination toward using shared bicycles more frequently to go shopping, experience local nature, and get refreshed. The Active Incorporator Group users were more interested in using bicycles than the other group. These results mainly established that some of the service’s users were interested not only in using the public bicycle-sharing service but also in engaging in social and local activities through it. The details of each group are shown in Fig. 5. Approximately 70% of the participants belonged to the Active Incorporator Group, including many of the registered members (public officers) and all of the respondents in their twenties.
Please cite this article in press as: Nakamura, H., Abe, N. The role of a non-profit organisation-run public bicycle-sharing programme: the case of Kitakyushu City, Japan. J. Transp. Geogr. (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.11.009
6
H. Nakamura, N. Abe / Journal of Transport Geography xxx (2013) xxx–xxx
Table 2 Questions and results. Questions about participation incentives
Average value scores (n = 100)
Principal component I
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15 Q16 Q17 Q18 Q19 Q20 Q21 Q22 Q23 Q24 Q25 Q26 Q27
To save transport expenses To ride a bicycle more frequently To ride an electric-assisted bicycle To join a car-sharing project as well To reduce car use for environmental reasons To reduce car use for health reasons To feel local nature and landscape during the bicycle ride There is no alternative transport More convenient than other transport systems Car parking is inconvenient Bicycle parking is inconvenient Riding a bicycle is safe and easy To visit shopping streets on a bicycle To support and sympathise with the NPO To join an eco-point project To access information about environmental issues Recommended by friends To join local activities To support and join projects administered by the local government To exchange information with local people To reduce car use for energy conservation reasons To use the renewable energy of electric-assisted bicycles and solar parking lots The Kitakyushu PBSP is ‘cool’ To get refreshed To try something new Because of a long-standing relationship with the NPO Unconscious participation Eigenvalue Proportion (%) Cumulative (%)
+ +: more than 0.34; +: more than 0.17;
: less than
0.17;
: less than
2.8 3.7 3.86 2.89 3.43 3.63 3.71 2.32 3.5 3.42 2.48 2.94 3.07 3.53 2.57 2.61 2.31 3.03 3.44 2.52 3.24 3.46 3.27 3.6 3.42 2.03 2.32
+ + + + + + +
+ + + +
II
III
+
+ +
++ + +
+ + +
+
+
+ + + + + + +
+
+ + +
8.3 31 31
IV
+ 2.5 9.4 40
2 7.4 48
+ + ++ 1.5 5.5 53
0.34.
40%
60%
80%
100%
General Interest Group
20%
Member (public officer) (n = 8)
Active Incorporator Group
0%
Member (public officer) (n = 34)
50s
Member (other) (n = 22)
60s
20s
Member (other) (n = 16)
30s 1-day user (n = 7)
40s
1-day user (n = 13)
Fig. 5. Details of each group.
Table 3 User involvement and factor analysis results. Questions about user involvement
Factor 1
I support localised production and consumption, and eat such foods I know many people in my neighbourhood, and have many chances to greet and make small talk with people I am actively involved in community improvement activities I have faith in government policies My community is a comfortable place to live, and I want to stay here for a long time I feel a strong attachment to my community, and like the local atmosphere and character I donate to local NPOs or other organisations Differences Proportion (%) Cumulative (%)
++ ++ ++ ++ – ++
+ +: more than 0.6; +: more than 0.3;
: less than
0.3;
: less than
0.43 32.9 32.9
Factor 2
+ ++ ++ ++ 0.53 32.3 65.2
0.6.
4.2. User involvement in the local community In order to see how the users of each group were involved in the local community, survey participants rated the degree to which
they agreed or disagreed with each statement (Table 3). A total of seven survey questions covering the users’ involvement in the local community were posed, and the answers were divided by group and examined using factor analysis (promax rotation).
Please cite this article in press as: Nakamura, H., Abe, N. The role of a non-profit organisation-run public bicycle-sharing programme: the case of Kitakyushu City, Japan. J. Transp. Geogr. (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.11.009
H. Nakamura, N. Abe / Journal of Transport Geography xxx (2013) xxx–xxx Table 4 Average factor scores 1 and 2 by each group. Scores of factor 1
Scores of factor 2
General Interest Group Member (public officer) (n = 8) Member (other) (n = 16) 1-day user (n = 7)
0.37 1.05 0.81
0.64 0.89 0.54
Active Incorporator Group Member (public officer) (n = 34) Member (other) (n = 22) 1-day user (n = 13)
0.34 0.52 0.18
0.22 0.44 0.46
Changes in users ’ transport modes
Uses of shared bicycles
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Member (public officer) (n = 8) Member (other) (n = 16) 1-day user (n = 7)
General Interest Group Member (public officer) (n = 8) Member (other) (n = 16) 1-day user (n = 7)
Active Incorporator Group Commuting Business use Sightseeing
Walk Bus Train
Shopping Others
Car Motorcycle Bicycle
Fig. 6. Uses of shared bicycles and change in transport modes of the Kitakyushu service by group.
Factor analysis was adopted because variability among observed and correlated variables must be described in terms of a potentially lower number of unobserved variables (called factors) to see joint variations in response to unobserved latent variables regarding the users’ involvement in the local community. Two factors, which were found beyond the cumulative proportion of 50%, are shown in Table 3. Factors 1 and 2 may show local activity and local attachment, respectively. The average scores of factors 1 and 2 by each group in Table 4 indicate that the users in the General Interest Group, especially the members (other), were more engaged in local activities than users in the Active Incorporator Group, especially the members (other).
7
service for official business purposes. Additionally, roughly 30% of one-day users used the service for sightseeing purposes. One remarkable characteristic is that, among registered members, the public officers used the service for business use, which is not reflected in Fig. 1. Changes in transport modes after the PBSP was introduced are also shown in Fig. 6. Specifically, we asked, ‘What kind of transport would you use to reach your destination if there was not a PBSP?’ Including the registered members and one-day users, approximately 40% of users converted to bicycling from walking, followed by those who converted from public transport such as bus, train, or monorail. On the other hand, because the municipal government agreed to a corporate contract for official business use as mentioned above, nearly 40% of registered members (public officers) converted their transport mode from car. Assuming that there were different travel distances and usage frequencies, we feel that there is no remarkable difference between the groups. However, more of the General Interest Group changed their transport mode from official car than from walking, but the Active Incorporator Group seems to have changed their transport mode more from walking than from official car. Not much substitution from car is reflected in Fig. 1. However, in Kitakyushu City, public officers who were registered members took the initiative to convert from car use based on the government’s relationship with the NPO and the spatially connected system location. The questionnaire also included questions about users’ satisfaction with the PBSP. The degree of both groups’ satisfaction with the PBSP is shown in Fig. 7. The results indicate that, regardless of what group the users belonged to, more than 80% of those surveyed were satisfied with the NPO-run PBSP in Kitakyushu City. In other words, the project, in tandem with other services, was able to satisfy participants overall, and many participants in both groups could satisfy a range of interests through participation in the project. However, some one-day users and non-public office members in the Active Incorporator Group were somewhat dissatisfied with the service. This result might stem from the fact that, unlike full members, one-day users could not experience all of the benefits of the NPO’s related projects. In addition, members of the Active Incorporator Group might think that access to the bicycle-sharing system should be increased or modified (e.g. by increasing the number of docking stations in the city).
5. Conclusion 4.3. Change of transport mode and user satisfaction by group The purposes for using the public bicycle-sharing service are shown in Fig. 6. More than half of respondents used the service mainly for business, and 90% or more of public officers used the
0%
20%
By examining the non-profit PBSP in the case of Kitakyushu City, Japan, this study was able to comprehensively investigate an alternative governance model for the implementation and operation of PBSPs. It examined the characteristics and role of an NPOrun small-scale PBSP and provided an initial analysis of its users,
40%
60%
80%
100%
General Interest Group Active Incorporator Group
Satisfied Member (public officer) (n = 8)
Member (public officer) (n = 34)
Member (other) (n = 16) 1-day user (n = 7)
Member (other) (n = 22)
Moderately Satisfied Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied Somewhat Dissatisfied
1-day user (n = 13)
Fig. 7. User satisfaction by group.
Please cite this article in press as: Nakamura, H., Abe, N. The role of a non-profit organisation-run public bicycle-sharing programme: the case of Kitakyushu City, Japan. J. Transp. Geogr. (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.11.009
8
H. Nakamura, N. Abe / Journal of Transport Geography xxx (2013) xxx–xxx
further contributing to knowledge to the as yet limited academic literature on PBSPs. In Kitakyushu PBSP case, where the scale of the PBSP is relatively small, the introduction of the project has proved to be very effective in stimulating the area. Before the introduction of the PBSP, open spaces and public facilities were not integrated with the city centre or with public transport. Both open spaces and the city centre are better suited for cycling rather than driving because of the difficulties to drive to or park in them. The use of the public bicycle-sharing service contributes to connecting the city centre, public facilities, and hub train stations. To better understand the characteristics of PBSP users, the authors conducted a questionnaire survey. The results revealed two groups of users that employed shared bicycles for utilitarian trips as well as for general interest, including community involvement. Results also indicate that people with a general interest in the bicycle-sharing service were more engaged in local activities than other users, although almost all the users were satisfied with the bicycle-sharing service regardless of their motivation to use. Notably, the local government took a leadership role in the project by contributing both financial support and users to the project, as municipal workers used PBSP bicycles rather than cars for government affairs. This paper suggests that PBSPs can contribute to the integration of the area in terms of physical coordination as well the engagement of local groups in improving the operations and management of PBSPs. However, this study is limited as it has only examined one but a crucial case study on a non-profit-led PBSP governance model. While this study’s findings cannot be generalised to PBSPs around the world, our findings could help improve the implementation of small-scale non-profit-led PBSPs, as well as inform small-scale PBSP policy and planning in Japan and elsewhere. It is suggested that future research should conduct a more in-depth socio-spatial analysis, evaluation and cross-comparison of programs that are comparable to that in Kitakyushu. It would be particularly interesting to examine schemes that use e-bikes rather than normal bicycles and to consider larger-scale schemes as these factors may result in different socio-spatial usage patterns of public bicycles. References Beroud, B., Anaya, E., 2012. Private interventions in a public service: an analysis of public bicycle schemes. In: Parkin, John (Ed.), Cycling and Sustainability: Transport and Sustainability, vol. 1. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 269–301 (Chapter 11).
City of Minneapolis, 2008. Non-Profit Business Plan for Twin Cities Bike Share System. City of Minneapolis, Minneapolis, MN. DeMaio, P., 2009. Bike-sharing: history, impacts, models of provision, and future. J. Public Transp. 12 (4), 41–56. Hasegawa, T., 2002. Efforts on the pilot project of the bike-sharing project in Hanshin area. Jpn. Soc. Traffic Eng. 37 (5), 68–73 (translated by the author from Japanese). Hikawa, Y., 2011. Development of a new parking lot business in Kanazawa City: from the case of Daiwa Anshin Parking. New City 60 (1), 70–71 (translated by the author from Japanese). Ishihara, T., 2011. Utilisation of a wallet phone for Yokohama City Community Cycle, the pilot community cycle project in Central Yokohama: efforts in bikesharing utilising cell phones. LASDEC 41 (8), 13–17 (translated by the author from Japanese). Kamihara, T., 2010. Rental bicycle project in Takamatsu City. New City 64 (1), 42–45 (translated by the author from Japanese). Kuromizu, K., 2010. The pilot community cycle project in Central Yokohama. New City 64 (1), 38–41 (translated by the author from Japanese). Makino, A., Yamashita, Y., Adachi, N., 2009. Design in the Nagoya community cycle system through citizen participation. In: Proceedings of the 56th Annual Conference of Japanese Society for the Science of Design, pp. 82–83 (translated by the author from Japanese). Midgley, P., 2009. The role of smart bike-sharing systems in urban mobility. Journeys 2, 23–31. Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT), 2010. Report on the Development and Investigation of Community Cycle Implementation Promotion, FY 2009. Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, Japan (translated by the author from Japanese). Mitamura, D., Sawa, M., Ishikawa, S., Hato, E., Hagiwara, T., 2009. Benefits and problems with the pilot bike-sharing project (Hokkaido Mobility Cafe). Proc. Annu. Conf. Jpn. Soc. Civil Eng. 64 (4), 53–54 (translated by the author from Japanese). Nadal, L., 2008. Velib one year later. Sustain. Transport 20, 8–13. Nakajima, Y., Yamaguchi, K., Takagi, K., Sagimori, K., 2007. Study on implementing a bike-sharing project in Setagaya Ward. Proc. Annu. Conf. Jpn. Soc. Civil Eng. 62 (4), 95–96 (translated by the author from Japanese). Nakamura, H., 2012. Strategies and characteristics of a non-profit organisation-run community cycle project with public–private partnership in Kitakyushu City. New City 66 (4), 65–69 (translated by the author from Japanese). Sahashi, T., 2010. Healthy city with community cycle: the 2009 pilot bike-sharing project in Nagoya. New City 64 (7), 76–81 (translated by the author from Japanese). Sawa, M., Suda, K., Matsuda, M., 2010. The pilot bike-sharing project in Sapporo and possible future developments. Proc. Annu. Conf. Jpn. Soc. Civil Eng. 65 (4), 373– 374 (translated by the author from Japanese). Shaheen, S., Guzman, S., Zhang, H., 2010. Bike-sharing in Europe, the Americas, and Asia: past, present, and future. J. Transp. Res. Board 2143, 159–167. Shaheen, S., Martin, E., Cohen, A., Finson, R., 2012. Public Bike Sharing in North America: Early Operator and User Understanding. Mineta Transportation Institute Report 11-26. Mineta Transportation Institute, San Jose, CA. Shaw, P., 2003. Multivariate Statistics for the Environmental Sciences. Hodder Arnold, London. Stata, 2009. Stata Multivariate Statistics Reference Manual Release 11. Stata Press, College Station, TX. United States Department of Transportation (USDOT), 2012. Bike Sharing in the United States: State of the Practice and Guide to Implementation. September 2012. Prepared by Toole Design Group and the Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center for USDOT Federal Highway Administration.
Please cite this article in press as: Nakamura, H., Abe, N. The role of a non-profit organisation-run public bicycle-sharing programme: the case of Kitakyushu City, Japan. J. Transp. Geogr. (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.11.009
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Transport Geography journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jtrangeo
The role of a non-profit organisation-run public bicycle-sharing programme: the case of Kitakyushu City, Japan Hiroki Nakamura a,⇑, Naoya Abe b,1 a b
Research Institute for East Asia Environments, Kyushu University, W2-1023, 744, Motooka, Nishi-ku, Fukuoka 819-0395, Japan Department of International Development Engineering, Tokyo Institute of Technology, 2-12-1-I4-4, O-okayama, Meguro-ku, Tokyo 152-8550, Japan
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Keywords: Bicycle-sharing Japan Non-profit organisation Management
a b s t r a c t Public bicycle-sharing programmes (PBSPs) are experiencing enormous growth as an increasing number of cities worldwide are adopting the scheme. PBSPs are managed and operated by the private sector; by local community groups, including non-profit organisations (NPOs); and by local governments. In many Japanese cities where private bicycle sharing is high, the scale of PBSPs is relatively small, leading to challenges such as difficulty in securing funding and appointing operators. This paper proposes that NPOs may have the capacity to operate and effectively manage PBSPs in conjunction with other non-profit activities to promote community development. Using a case study approach and implementing a user perception survey, this study examines the experience of a small-scale, NPO-run PBSP in Kitakyushu City, Japan. Findings show that NPO management and operation added value to the PBSP. In addition, some users were interested in the PBSP beyond its role as a means of transport. These users tend to engage in local activities more frequently than other users. Finally, almost all of the users were satisfied with the bicycle-sharing service, regardless of their reasons for using the programme. The insights gained from these results may help improve small-scale PBSP implementation, policy, and planning, both in Japan and beyond. Crown Copyright Ó 2013 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction Public bicycle-sharing programmes (PBSPs) have experienced enormous growth as more and more cities adopt bicycle sharing worldwide (Shaheen et al., 2010; Midgley, 2009). These projects have adopted various management models. In addition to local governments and transport business operators, non-profit organisations (NPOs) and private companies oversee these projects and manage public transport to develop the local community (Beroud and Anaya, 2012). The Paris PBSP is a large-scale model operated by an advertising company; it has attracted significant attention and has also been widely researched (Nadal, 2008). In comparison, pilot programmes in Japan tend to be smaller in scale (Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT), 2010). Early evidence suggests that some larger programmes (those involving 50 or more stations) have had more government involvement, while small to medium programmes (2–50 stations) tend to be operated by NPOs (United States Department of Transportation (USDOT), 2012). However, to
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +81 92 802 2566; fax: +81 92 802 2564. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (H. Nakamura), nabe@ide. titech.ac.jp (N. Abe). 1 Tel./fax: +81 3 5734 3797.
the authors’ knowledge, few studies have examined the role of local NPOs in the operation of small-scale PBSPs. To the authors’ knowledge, the few studies that have examined NPOs as operators (e.g., Beroud and Anaya, 2012) do so in a general way. This paper advances the existing literature by investigating the extent to which an NPO-run scheme can be a viable governance model in PBSP implementation. Furthermore, the analysis of user perceptions in our case study city – Kitakyushu City in Japan, where the scale of the PBSP is relatively small – shows that a smart and skilful management system benefits the local area. Insights provided by this study may help improve the planning and implementation of small-scale PBSPs in Japan and elsewhere.
2. Review of past studies 2.1. Non-profit organisations as public bicycle-sharing operators PBSPs have been introduced in a number of urban centres, including Paris, London, Washington, DC, and Montreal. Shaheen et al. (2010) discussed four generations of PBSPs, including: (1) white bikes, or free-bike systems; (2) coin-deposit systems; (3) IT-based systems; and (4) demand-responsive, multimodal systems. A fourth generation PBSP, according to DeMaio (2009) and Shaheen et al. (2010), would be characterised by system
0966-6923/$ - see front matter Crown Copyright Ó 2013 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.11.009
Please cite this article in press as: Nakamura, H., Abe, N. The role of a non-profit organisation-run public bicycle-sharing programme: the case of Kitakyushu City, Japan. J. Transp. Geogr. (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.11.009
2
H. Nakamura, N. Abe / Journal of Transport Geography xxx (2013) xxx–xxx
integration (e.g. transit integration, smart card integration with other transport modes), technological innovations (e.g. Radio Frequency Identification) and responsive design (e.g. surveillance system in docking stations). To date, the most prominent funding sources for PBSPs have been municipalities and advertising partnerships. Advertising companies operate PBSPs in exchange for the right to advertise on city streets and billboards (e.g. Brisbane’s CityCycle). Beroud and Anaya (2012) cited two key governance models in the provision and operation of PBSPs: market initiatives (private bodies) and authority initiatives (public bodies). Specific examples include governments, quasi-governmental transport agencies, NPOs, advertising companies, and for-profit companies (DeMaio, 2009). The four main characteristics of a non-profit model, as discussed in studies by the City of Minneapolis (2008), DeMaio (2009), USDOT (2012) and Shaheen et al. (2012), are: 1. An NPO can leverage the popularity of bicycle sharing to accomplish important social benefits, including: a. Education about cyclist safety and the potential to reduce car dependency. b. Coordination with employer wellness projects to create incentives for healthy lifestyles. c. Advocacy for bicycleand pedestrian-friendly infrastructure. 2. The non-profit model may help raise awareness of bicycling as an additional and complementary mode with other bicycle-related non-profit activities. 3. The non-profit model benefits the locality. An NPO can obtain the capital needed for initial equipment purchase through public subsidies and private sponsorship. This model is well positioned to operate the system at low cost by using local contractors and employees, and by obtaining cash and in-kind sponsorship. 4. The non-profit mission is aligned with the interests of public users as well as economic concerns. Although the mission of NPOs is not to make a profit, they aim to manage the projects efficiently and to satisfy their customers. Based on the above references, this paper hypothesises that important contributing factors to effectively managing small-scale non-profit PBSPs include an operator’s relationship with the local government and residents, as well as the spatial effective connection between the city centre, residences, public facilities and public transit stations. Moreover, small-scale schemes must be flexible enough to respond to the needs of potential users in the local community. Furthermore, the non-profit model must not only provide public transport but also take the initiative to encourage community involvement and have been actively involved in community activities to meet various social objectives. In general, while the above studies suggest the key attributes and roles of NPOs as operators, no case studies of small-scale PBSPs in Japan have used primary data (e.g. using questionnaire surveys) to comprehensively examine an NPO-operated PBSP. Therefore, this study looks at the non-profit model in a Japanese context. The next section reviews relevant literature on current PBSPs in Japan.
3. Public bicycle-sharing projects and users in Japan In Japan, PBSPs and pilot projects have been carried out in many cities and areas, such as Kitakyushu City, Toyama City, Setagaya Ward (Tokyo), Yokohama City, Sapporo City, Hiroshima City, Nagoya City, Hanshin Area, Chigasaki City, Okayama City, Sendai City, and Kanazawa City. Studies of those projects are described
in Hasegawa (2002), Hikawa (2011), Ishihara (2011), Kamihara (2010), Kuromizu (2010), Makino et al. (2009), Mitamura et al. (2009), Nakajima et al. (2007), Nakamura (2012), Sahashi (2010), and Sawa et al. (2010). In addition, MLIT (2010) summarised these projects and their characteristics, as shown in Table 1 and Fig. 1. The pilot projects in Japan typically employ about 50–300 bicycles. This is smaller in scale than the approximately 20,000 bicycles used in Paris and the 6000 bicycles used in London. The PBSP per bicycle per day utilisation rate ranged from a low of 0.22 to a high of almost 65.96. Although the purposes of usage varied across different cities or areas, bicycles were generally used for sightseeing, except in Sendai and Nagoya, where the bicycles were used primarily for shopping. It is interesting to note that bicycles were rarely used for business purposes. Additionally, Nagoya’s relatively large-scale pilot project allowed for special features to be incorporated into the system, such as high-density bicycle access docking stations in vacant buildings of local shopping areas, which helped change users’ choice of transport mode. As shown in Fig. 1, while many users shifted from using public transport, such as buses and trains, to PBSPs, fewer private car users shifted to bicycles. 3. The Kitakyushu non-profit organisation-run public bicyclesharing project This study focuses on a PBSP in Kitakyushu, a government-designated city located at the northeast tip of Fukuoka prefecture in the Kyushu region. Kitakyushu is an international city of more than 970,000 people that borders the main island of Japan. The city has seven wards, with Kokura station in Kokura-kita ward serving as the main rail hub of the city. The Kitakyushu public bicycle-sharing service is mainly accessible in the Kokura station area, although there is another service area near Yahata station in Yahata-higashi ward (Fig. 2). In this section, the authors summarise the characteristics of the cooperation and the spatial connections between the non-profit operator of the PBSP in Kitakyushu City, the local administration, and private companies, as well as the characteristics of the project’s operation system. 3.1. Cooperation and diversification of activities for sustainable operation Since 2003, the NPO that operates the Kitakyushu PBSP has managed a sightseeing bicycle-rental business using electric-assisted bicycles, parking lots around urban stations, and car-sharing businesses in Kitakyushu City Traffic Park, which operates traffic education projects. Through these businesses, the organisation has gained experience in co-operating with the municipal government. The PBSP was launched following repeated discussions with the municipal government to address various bicycle-related problems in the area. The NPO carried out the facility construction and has been responsible for maintenance and operations since. However, it is important to note that the organisation was supported by the municipal and national governments at many points. For example, national government provided initial capital in the form of subsidies, while the Kitakyushu municipal government assisted with promotional activities. Public officers now use the service for their official business. The NPO’s purpose is to provide various community benefits and help improve the quality of life of the general public. In addition, as the organisation attaches importance to continuity in managing and operating the project, and to connecting the city spatially and politically, it reinvests part of the profits from its related businesses back into the PBSP. The complementary aims of some such related businesses include: to counteract illegal bicycle
Please cite this article in press as: Nakamura, H., Abe, N. The role of a non-profit organisation-run public bicycle-sharing programme: the case of Kitakyushu City, Japan. J. Transp. Geogr. (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.11.009
3
H. Nakamura, N. Abe / Journal of Transport Geography xxx (2013) xxx–xxx Table 1 Overview of bicycle-sharing pilot projects in Japan. Source: Created by the authors using data from MLIT (2010).
Project duration Number of docking stations Number of bicycles Average daily usage Daily utilisation rates per bicycle
Hiroshima
Nagoya
Chigasaki
Okayama
Sendai
Kanazawa
November–December 2009 11
October–December 2009 30
December 2009– February 2010 19
September 2011– March 2012 7
November 2010 10
August–October 2009 10
110 74.3 0.68
300 1647 5.49
51 – –
100 22 0.22
100 596.1 5.96
100 354.5 3.54
Changes in users’ transport modes
Uses of shared bicycles 0%
50%
0%
100%
50%
membership card system, in which 10% of the usage fee is returned to these users as eco points.
100%
Hiroshima (n = 62)
3.2. Operating staff of the Kitakyushu project
Nagoya (n = 1457) Chigasaki (n = 64)
In addition to full-time staff members engaged in strategy drafting, office work, and general affairs, the NPO employs full-time traffic safety guides and aged citizens as part-time traffic safety instructors. These part-time staff members, who know the local people and geography well, communicate with bicycle users, patrol the project’s parking lots, perform traffic safety guidance, and maintain the facilities and equipment, in addition to providing immediate response in emergencies. Furthermore, they react flexibly to users. For example, staff members explain how to use the system, and provide local information (such as sightseeing destinations) to users. Regardless of their employment status (part-time or full-time), staff members actively participate in events hosted by the local municipality related to regional development, environmental beautification, and other activities. This operating framework, which involves close staff engagement with the management, users, and the local community, is a major characteristic of the Kitakyushu PBSP.
Okayama (n = 183) Sendai (n = 2583) Kanazawa (n = 21522) Commuting Business use Sightseeing
Car Motorcycle Bicycle No travel
Walk Bus Train Taxi
Shopping Others
Fig. 1. Uses of shared bicycles and changes in users’ transport modes. Source: Created by the authors using data from MLIT (2010).
parking by organising bicycle parking lots (hardware-related measure); traffic safety education and improvement regarding the bicycle-use environment (software-related measure); and rental of electric bicycles for sightseeing. In addition, the organisation contributes to local community improvement. For example, it accepts student volunteers and interns from the region, employs elderly people as traffic safety instructors, actively participates in community-building activities using the PBSP, and develops the community using the ‘eco point’ (local community currency)
Japan
3.3. System and spatial management strategy In Kitakyushu City, there are 116 electric-assisted bicycles accessible at 10 docking stations, 7 of which are located in the
Bicycle sharing system
Kitakyushu City
Kitakyushu City
Kokura Station Yahata Station
Tokyo
Rail line
10 km
Spatial conceptaround Kokura Station Kokura
Rail line
Bicycle-sharing docking station Bicycle parking lot Bus stop Bus main route Open space Public facility City center (shopping area)
River
Monorailline
Fig. 2. Maps and figures of interest in the area.
Please cite this article in press as: Nakamura, H., Abe, N. The role of a non-profit organisation-run public bicycle-sharing programme: the case of Kitakyushu City, Japan. J. Transp. Geogr. (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.11.009
4
H. Nakamura, N. Abe / Journal of Transport Geography xxx (2013) xxx–xxx
downtown district near Kokura station. Only electric-assisted bicycles are used for the project. The keys and batteries for the electric bicycles are managed using a system of touch-panel lockers (Fig. 2). As the docking stations downtown are expected to be used daily by local residents, including public officers, they are installed in front of public transport stations and public facilities. The longest distance between docking stations is 2.2 km, so that users can move from one docking station to the next closest one within 10 min or so. As mentioned above, the PBSP is a part of other bicycle-use promotion and community-building projects run by the NPO through public–private partnerships. The NPO’s PBSP management strategy has the following goals: (1) promote active and appropriate private bicycle use; (2) monitor and manage private bicycle parking areas to reduce the incidence of illegally parked bicycles around public transport stations and other public places; and (3) develop and introduce a public electric bicycle-sharing project that integrates private bicycle parking area management and car-sharing systems. Some of the docking stations were first introduced within the mixed use city centre, which accommodated a number of land uses, including the retail shopping district, public facilities, open spaces, all of which were physically integrated by a train station hub. The spatial arrangement of the public bicycle-sharing service is illustrated in Fig. 2. The vertical line represents the train line and the horizontal line represents the monorail line; near the intersection of these lines is the city centre. Although the scale of the PBSP is relatively small, the introduction of the project has proved to be very effective in stimulating the area. Before the introduction of the PBSP, open spaces and public facilities were not integrated with the city centre or with public transport, and the entire area was difficult to drive or park in, making it better suited to cycling. The average monthly PBSP usage is displayed in Fig. 3. The use of the public bicycle-sharing service is apparently facilitating connections between the city centre (shopping area), public facilities, and hub train stations, with the strongest connections observed between the train stations and public facilities through the open space and the city centre. The motivations and purposes underlying this usage will be analysed via an investigation of user characteristics in Section 4. 3.4. Users of the Kitakyushu project Users must register to participate in the Kitakyushu project. The monthly base membership charge is 525 yen (5.35 USD as of 21 October 2013). The fee is 105 yen (1.07 USD as of 21 October 2013) per hour for actual usage, and the maximum charge per day is 525 yen. In addition to the hourly charge, users can choose
a monthly payment system. By paying 5250 yen (53.5 USD as of 21 October 2013), they can use the service as many times as they like during a month. The average monthly wage for Kitakyushu city officers is around 400,000 yen (4075 USD as of 21 October 2013), so the monthly cost for the service is less than 1.5% of the Kitakyushu City officers’ monthly income. Additionally, for unregistered users, such as tourists or people on temporary business, the project offers a one-day charge of 500 yen (5.09 USD as of 21 October 2013). If a user wants to use both the car- and bicycle-sharing services, they must pay the relevant initiation fees for both programmes. The payment method is integrated so that both can be easily used. Unlike some PBSPs, the Kitakyushu programme has no gratis option, given the minimum bus or monorail fare is 100 yen (1.02 USD as of 21 October 2013) and the public bicyclesharing service is being promoted as a complementary form of public transport. Because of this, average monthly usage may be less than if a free option were offered, or if registered membership was not a general requirement. As of 31 December 2011, the PBSP reached 18 registered corporate members (comprising 604 people) and 261 individual registered members, demonstrating an upward trend in membership (Fig. 4). The daily mean usage varies by month. Total daily usage generally ranged between 50 and 80 rides. Daily utilisation rates per bicycle were 0.43–0.69. These results are similar to those of the Hiroshima City project, which is similar in size to the Kitakyushu project (Table 1). Included in the total corporate member count is Kitakyushu municipal government officers, who use the public bicycles for their official business. To promote low-carbon communities, public officers took the initiative to use the PBSP voluntarily since September 2010. The number of registered members was 366 persons in total, in 38 sections, accounting for approximately 40% of total users. 4. User characteristics of the Kitakyushu project In this section, we analyse PBSP user characteristics based on the results of questionnaire surveys that were conducted in Kitakyushu City. In such a small-scale and unique project run by an NPO, understanding user relationships and characteristics is crucial to sustainable management. Questionnaires were distributed to all users (both registered members and one-day users) of the PBSP on 12 January 2010 (collection deadline: 24 January 2010). Of the 300 questionnaires distributed, 117 completed survey forms were collected (a 39% response rate), of which about were valid. Men accounted for 60% of registered members (33% were public officers and 27% others) and 12% of one-day users. Women accounted for 20% of registered members (12% public officers and 8% others) and 8% of one-day users.
Rail line
4.1. Grouping users by participation incentive Monorail line
Amount of average monthly usage 1-50 151-300 51-150 River
Fig. 3. The spatial amount of average monthly usage. Source: Created by the authors using NPO data.
To understand users’ participation incentives, we asked the respondents to rate the 27 statements shown in Table 2 using a Likert scale for each item according to their participation incentives. According to the average value scores shown in Table 2, ‘To ride an electric-assisted bicycle’ is the highest participation incentive on average. The second, third, and fourth highest are ‘To feel local nature and landscape during the bicycle ride’, ‘To ride a bicycle more frequently’, and ‘To get refreshed’, in turn. For the participation incentive ‘There is no alternative transport’, the average value score is very low at 2.32. Before using the public bicycle-sharing service, respondents had used other means of transport, so few people felt strongly that there was no other means available.
Please cite this article in press as: Nakamura, H., Abe, N. The role of a non-profit organisation-run public bicycle-sharing programme: the case of Kitakyushu City, Japan. J. Transp. Geogr. (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.11.009
H. Nakamura, N. Abe / Journal of Transport Geography xxx (2013) xxx–xxx (Number of members)
5
(Amount of average daily usage)
(Year)
Fig. 4. Kitakyushu project membership and daily usage rates. Source: Created by the authors using NPO data.
With regard to bicycles and parking lots, the average score of ‘Car parking is not convenient’ is high at 3.42, while that of ‘Bicycle parking is not convenient’ is low at 2.48. Relatively few users felt that bicycle parking was inconvenient before using the public bicycle-sharing service. For the incentive ‘To support and sympathise with the NPO’, the average score is high at 3.53. Therefore, some users assented to the NPO’s mission and wanted to actively support and sympathise with it. It is difficult to generalise users’ tendencies or participation incentives using these simple results. To allow us to determine the overall characteristics of the various participation incentives from some of the principal components, we then analysed the results using a principal component analysis (PCA). PCA is a useful method to find optimal ways of combining variables into a small number of subsets. The analysis was performed using StataÒ 11.1 data analysis software (Stata, 2009). By calculating the weighted mean average from the PCA, we were able to identify overall characteristics. According to Stata, PCA is a statistical technique used for data reduction. The leading eigenvectors from the eigen-decomposition of the correlation or covariance matrix of the variables describe a series of uncorrelated linear combinations of the variables that contain most of the variance. In addition to data reduction, the eigenvectors from a PCA are often inspected to learn more about the underlying structure of the data (Stata, 2009). An orthogonal transformation was used to convert a set of observations of possibly correlated variables into a set of values of uncorrelated variables. The uncorrelated variables are called principal components (PCs). The number of PCs is less than or equal to the number of original variables. The first PC has the highest variance. PCA results are usually discussed in terms of component scores and loadings. The former are the transformed variable values corresponding to a particular case in the data, and the latter are the weights by which each standardised original variable should be multiplied to get the component score (Shaw, 2003). PCA was applied to the 27 questions (i.e. variables) with five-level weighting for evaluations to determine the PCs, as shown in Table 2. In this section, we review PCs I to IV, with cumulative contribution ratios above 50%. The contribution ratios for these components were 30.7%, 9.4%, 7.4%, and 5.5%, respectively. Details of the four PCs are as follows: PC I: The first component showed wide interest in social and local issues, such as the environment, health, local community development, renewable energy, and other NPO activities. PC II: The second component showed an inclination toward using shared bicycles in order to use bicycles more frequently to go shopping, experience local nature, and get refreshed.
PC III: The third component showed the necessity of using shared bicycles because of a lack of alternative modes of transport and the inconvenience of parking automobiles. PC IV: The fourth component showed no specific, strong reasons for using shared bicycles but some curiosity about using them. After determining the four PCs based on 27 questions, the respondents were categorised into two groups by cluster analysis based on the scores of the four PCs. Cluster analysis stopping rules were used to determine the number of clusters, and analysis was performed using the Stata (2009) software package. The basic concept of cluster analysis is to group similar objects into categories in a way that the degree of association between two objects is maximal if they belong to the same group, and minimal otherwise. The average component score of Group 1 (n = 31) is 2.83, 0.45, 0.07, and 0.33, and Group 2 (n = 69) is 1.27, 0.20, 0.03, and 0.15 in components I, II, III, and IV, respectively. Following this analysis, each group was named as follows: Group 1: Users with general interest in social and local issues (General Interest Group). Group 2: Users aiming to actively incorporate bicycles into their lives (Active Incorporator Group). Users in the General Interest Group had positive component I scores. Component I, as seen in Table 2, included various reasons for using the public bicycle-sharing service. The reasons were not only transport related, such as ‘To save transport expenses’, ‘To ride a bicycle more frequently’, ‘To ride an electric-assisted bicycle’, and ‘To join a car-sharing project as well’, but also included wanting to engage in environmentally friendly and healthy activities, join and exchange information about local activities, and support local organisations and government. The latter reasons were related to community-building activities, and the General Interest Group users were interested in community building through the PBSP to some extent. In contrast, users in the Active Incorporator Group had negative component I scores and positive component II scores. As mentioned earlier, principal component II indicates an inclination toward using shared bicycles more frequently to go shopping, experience local nature, and get refreshed. The Active Incorporator Group users were more interested in using bicycles than the other group. These results mainly established that some of the service’s users were interested not only in using the public bicycle-sharing service but also in engaging in social and local activities through it. The details of each group are shown in Fig. 5. Approximately 70% of the participants belonged to the Active Incorporator Group, including many of the registered members (public officers) and all of the respondents in their twenties.
Please cite this article in press as: Nakamura, H., Abe, N. The role of a non-profit organisation-run public bicycle-sharing programme: the case of Kitakyushu City, Japan. J. Transp. Geogr. (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.11.009
6
H. Nakamura, N. Abe / Journal of Transport Geography xxx (2013) xxx–xxx
Table 2 Questions and results. Questions about participation incentives
Average value scores (n = 100)
Principal component I
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15 Q16 Q17 Q18 Q19 Q20 Q21 Q22 Q23 Q24 Q25 Q26 Q27
To save transport expenses To ride a bicycle more frequently To ride an electric-assisted bicycle To join a car-sharing project as well To reduce car use for environmental reasons To reduce car use for health reasons To feel local nature and landscape during the bicycle ride There is no alternative transport More convenient than other transport systems Car parking is inconvenient Bicycle parking is inconvenient Riding a bicycle is safe and easy To visit shopping streets on a bicycle To support and sympathise with the NPO To join an eco-point project To access information about environmental issues Recommended by friends To join local activities To support and join projects administered by the local government To exchange information with local people To reduce car use for energy conservation reasons To use the renewable energy of electric-assisted bicycles and solar parking lots The Kitakyushu PBSP is ‘cool’ To get refreshed To try something new Because of a long-standing relationship with the NPO Unconscious participation Eigenvalue Proportion (%) Cumulative (%)
+ +: more than 0.34; +: more than 0.17;
: less than
0.17;
: less than
2.8 3.7 3.86 2.89 3.43 3.63 3.71 2.32 3.5 3.42 2.48 2.94 3.07 3.53 2.57 2.61 2.31 3.03 3.44 2.52 3.24 3.46 3.27 3.6 3.42 2.03 2.32
+ + + + + + +
+ + + +
II
III
+
+ +
++ + +
+ + +
+
+
+ + + + + + +
+
+ + +
8.3 31 31
IV
+ 2.5 9.4 40
2 7.4 48
+ + ++ 1.5 5.5 53
0.34.
40%
60%
80%
100%
General Interest Group
20%
Member (public officer) (n = 8)
Active Incorporator Group
0%
Member (public officer) (n = 34)
50s
Member (other) (n = 22)
60s
20s
Member (other) (n = 16)
30s 1-day user (n = 7)
40s
1-day user (n = 13)
Fig. 5. Details of each group.
Table 3 User involvement and factor analysis results. Questions about user involvement
Factor 1
I support localised production and consumption, and eat such foods I know many people in my neighbourhood, and have many chances to greet and make small talk with people I am actively involved in community improvement activities I have faith in government policies My community is a comfortable place to live, and I want to stay here for a long time I feel a strong attachment to my community, and like the local atmosphere and character I donate to local NPOs or other organisations Differences Proportion (%) Cumulative (%)
++ ++ ++ ++ – ++
+ +: more than 0.6; +: more than 0.3;
: less than
0.3;
: less than
0.43 32.9 32.9
Factor 2
+ ++ ++ ++ 0.53 32.3 65.2
0.6.
4.2. User involvement in the local community In order to see how the users of each group were involved in the local community, survey participants rated the degree to which
they agreed or disagreed with each statement (Table 3). A total of seven survey questions covering the users’ involvement in the local community were posed, and the answers were divided by group and examined using factor analysis (promax rotation).
Please cite this article in press as: Nakamura, H., Abe, N. The role of a non-profit organisation-run public bicycle-sharing programme: the case of Kitakyushu City, Japan. J. Transp. Geogr. (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.11.009
H. Nakamura, N. Abe / Journal of Transport Geography xxx (2013) xxx–xxx Table 4 Average factor scores 1 and 2 by each group. Scores of factor 1
Scores of factor 2
General Interest Group Member (public officer) (n = 8) Member (other) (n = 16) 1-day user (n = 7)
0.37 1.05 0.81
0.64 0.89 0.54
Active Incorporator Group Member (public officer) (n = 34) Member (other) (n = 22) 1-day user (n = 13)
0.34 0.52 0.18
0.22 0.44 0.46
Changes in users ’ transport modes
Uses of shared bicycles
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Member (public officer) (n = 8) Member (other) (n = 16) 1-day user (n = 7)
General Interest Group Member (public officer) (n = 8) Member (other) (n = 16) 1-day user (n = 7)
Active Incorporator Group Commuting Business use Sightseeing
Walk Bus Train
Shopping Others
Car Motorcycle Bicycle
Fig. 6. Uses of shared bicycles and change in transport modes of the Kitakyushu service by group.
Factor analysis was adopted because variability among observed and correlated variables must be described in terms of a potentially lower number of unobserved variables (called factors) to see joint variations in response to unobserved latent variables regarding the users’ involvement in the local community. Two factors, which were found beyond the cumulative proportion of 50%, are shown in Table 3. Factors 1 and 2 may show local activity and local attachment, respectively. The average scores of factors 1 and 2 by each group in Table 4 indicate that the users in the General Interest Group, especially the members (other), were more engaged in local activities than users in the Active Incorporator Group, especially the members (other).
7
service for official business purposes. Additionally, roughly 30% of one-day users used the service for sightseeing purposes. One remarkable characteristic is that, among registered members, the public officers used the service for business use, which is not reflected in Fig. 1. Changes in transport modes after the PBSP was introduced are also shown in Fig. 6. Specifically, we asked, ‘What kind of transport would you use to reach your destination if there was not a PBSP?’ Including the registered members and one-day users, approximately 40% of users converted to bicycling from walking, followed by those who converted from public transport such as bus, train, or monorail. On the other hand, because the municipal government agreed to a corporate contract for official business use as mentioned above, nearly 40% of registered members (public officers) converted their transport mode from car. Assuming that there were different travel distances and usage frequencies, we feel that there is no remarkable difference between the groups. However, more of the General Interest Group changed their transport mode from official car than from walking, but the Active Incorporator Group seems to have changed their transport mode more from walking than from official car. Not much substitution from car is reflected in Fig. 1. However, in Kitakyushu City, public officers who were registered members took the initiative to convert from car use based on the government’s relationship with the NPO and the spatially connected system location. The questionnaire also included questions about users’ satisfaction with the PBSP. The degree of both groups’ satisfaction with the PBSP is shown in Fig. 7. The results indicate that, regardless of what group the users belonged to, more than 80% of those surveyed were satisfied with the NPO-run PBSP in Kitakyushu City. In other words, the project, in tandem with other services, was able to satisfy participants overall, and many participants in both groups could satisfy a range of interests through participation in the project. However, some one-day users and non-public office members in the Active Incorporator Group were somewhat dissatisfied with the service. This result might stem from the fact that, unlike full members, one-day users could not experience all of the benefits of the NPO’s related projects. In addition, members of the Active Incorporator Group might think that access to the bicycle-sharing system should be increased or modified (e.g. by increasing the number of docking stations in the city).
5. Conclusion 4.3. Change of transport mode and user satisfaction by group The purposes for using the public bicycle-sharing service are shown in Fig. 6. More than half of respondents used the service mainly for business, and 90% or more of public officers used the
0%
20%
By examining the non-profit PBSP in the case of Kitakyushu City, Japan, this study was able to comprehensively investigate an alternative governance model for the implementation and operation of PBSPs. It examined the characteristics and role of an NPOrun small-scale PBSP and provided an initial analysis of its users,
40%
60%
80%
100%
General Interest Group Active Incorporator Group
Satisfied Member (public officer) (n = 8)
Member (public officer) (n = 34)
Member (other) (n = 16) 1-day user (n = 7)
Member (other) (n = 22)
Moderately Satisfied Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied Somewhat Dissatisfied
1-day user (n = 13)
Fig. 7. User satisfaction by group.
Please cite this article in press as: Nakamura, H., Abe, N. The role of a non-profit organisation-run public bicycle-sharing programme: the case of Kitakyushu City, Japan. J. Transp. Geogr. (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.11.009
8
H. Nakamura, N. Abe / Journal of Transport Geography xxx (2013) xxx–xxx
further contributing to knowledge to the as yet limited academic literature on PBSPs. In Kitakyushu PBSP case, where the scale of the PBSP is relatively small, the introduction of the project has proved to be very effective in stimulating the area. Before the introduction of the PBSP, open spaces and public facilities were not integrated with the city centre or with public transport. Both open spaces and the city centre are better suited for cycling rather than driving because of the difficulties to drive to or park in them. The use of the public bicycle-sharing service contributes to connecting the city centre, public facilities, and hub train stations. To better understand the characteristics of PBSP users, the authors conducted a questionnaire survey. The results revealed two groups of users that employed shared bicycles for utilitarian trips as well as for general interest, including community involvement. Results also indicate that people with a general interest in the bicycle-sharing service were more engaged in local activities than other users, although almost all the users were satisfied with the bicycle-sharing service regardless of their motivation to use. Notably, the local government took a leadership role in the project by contributing both financial support and users to the project, as municipal workers used PBSP bicycles rather than cars for government affairs. This paper suggests that PBSPs can contribute to the integration of the area in terms of physical coordination as well the engagement of local groups in improving the operations and management of PBSPs. However, this study is limited as it has only examined one but a crucial case study on a non-profit-led PBSP governance model. While this study’s findings cannot be generalised to PBSPs around the world, our findings could help improve the implementation of small-scale non-profit-led PBSPs, as well as inform small-scale PBSP policy and planning in Japan and elsewhere. It is suggested that future research should conduct a more in-depth socio-spatial analysis, evaluation and cross-comparison of programs that are comparable to that in Kitakyushu. It would be particularly interesting to examine schemes that use e-bikes rather than normal bicycles and to consider larger-scale schemes as these factors may result in different socio-spatial usage patterns of public bicycles. References Beroud, B., Anaya, E., 2012. Private interventions in a public service: an analysis of public bicycle schemes. In: Parkin, John (Ed.), Cycling and Sustainability: Transport and Sustainability, vol. 1. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 269–301 (Chapter 11).
City of Minneapolis, 2008. Non-Profit Business Plan for Twin Cities Bike Share System. City of Minneapolis, Minneapolis, MN. DeMaio, P., 2009. Bike-sharing: history, impacts, models of provision, and future. J. Public Transp. 12 (4), 41–56. Hasegawa, T., 2002. Efforts on the pilot project of the bike-sharing project in Hanshin area. Jpn. Soc. Traffic Eng. 37 (5), 68–73 (translated by the author from Japanese). Hikawa, Y., 2011. Development of a new parking lot business in Kanazawa City: from the case of Daiwa Anshin Parking. New City 60 (1), 70–71 (translated by the author from Japanese). Ishihara, T., 2011. Utilisation of a wallet phone for Yokohama City Community Cycle, the pilot community cycle project in Central Yokohama: efforts in bikesharing utilising cell phones. LASDEC 41 (8), 13–17 (translated by the author from Japanese). Kamihara, T., 2010. Rental bicycle project in Takamatsu City. New City 64 (1), 42–45 (translated by the author from Japanese). Kuromizu, K., 2010. The pilot community cycle project in Central Yokohama. New City 64 (1), 38–41 (translated by the author from Japanese). Makino, A., Yamashita, Y., Adachi, N., 2009. Design in the Nagoya community cycle system through citizen participation. In: Proceedings of the 56th Annual Conference of Japanese Society for the Science of Design, pp. 82–83 (translated by the author from Japanese). Midgley, P., 2009. The role of smart bike-sharing systems in urban mobility. Journeys 2, 23–31. Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT), 2010. Report on the Development and Investigation of Community Cycle Implementation Promotion, FY 2009. Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, Japan (translated by the author from Japanese). Mitamura, D., Sawa, M., Ishikawa, S., Hato, E., Hagiwara, T., 2009. Benefits and problems with the pilot bike-sharing project (Hokkaido Mobility Cafe). Proc. Annu. Conf. Jpn. Soc. Civil Eng. 64 (4), 53–54 (translated by the author from Japanese). Nadal, L., 2008. Velib one year later. Sustain. Transport 20, 8–13. Nakajima, Y., Yamaguchi, K., Takagi, K., Sagimori, K., 2007. Study on implementing a bike-sharing project in Setagaya Ward. Proc. Annu. Conf. Jpn. Soc. Civil Eng. 62 (4), 95–96 (translated by the author from Japanese). Nakamura, H., 2012. Strategies and characteristics of a non-profit organisation-run community cycle project with public–private partnership in Kitakyushu City. New City 66 (4), 65–69 (translated by the author from Japanese). Sahashi, T., 2010. Healthy city with community cycle: the 2009 pilot bike-sharing project in Nagoya. New City 64 (7), 76–81 (translated by the author from Japanese). Sawa, M., Suda, K., Matsuda, M., 2010. The pilot bike-sharing project in Sapporo and possible future developments. Proc. Annu. Conf. Jpn. Soc. Civil Eng. 65 (4), 373– 374 (translated by the author from Japanese). Shaheen, S., Guzman, S., Zhang, H., 2010. Bike-sharing in Europe, the Americas, and Asia: past, present, and future. J. Transp. Res. Board 2143, 159–167. Shaheen, S., Martin, E., Cohen, A., Finson, R., 2012. Public Bike Sharing in North America: Early Operator and User Understanding. Mineta Transportation Institute Report 11-26. Mineta Transportation Institute, San Jose, CA. Shaw, P., 2003. Multivariate Statistics for the Environmental Sciences. Hodder Arnold, London. Stata, 2009. Stata Multivariate Statistics Reference Manual Release 11. Stata Press, College Station, TX. United States Department of Transportation (USDOT), 2012. Bike Sharing in the United States: State of the Practice and Guide to Implementation. September 2012. Prepared by Toole Design Group and the Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center for USDOT Federal Highway Administration.
Please cite this article in press as: Nakamura, H., Abe, N. The role of a non-profit organisation-run public bicycle-sharing programme: the case of Kitakyushu City, Japan. J. Transp. Geogr. (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.11.009