Determining the Sustainable Development Strategies and Adoption Paths for Public Bike-Sharing Service Systems (PBSSSs) under Various Users’ Considerations
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Exploring Users’ Service Needs for the PBSSSs
2.1. Main Service (MS)
2.2. Main Facilities (MF)
2.3. Ancillary Service (AS)
2.4. Affiliated Equipment (AE)
Aspects/Criteria | Evaluation Criteria Description |
---|---|
Main services (MS) | |
Bike rental services (MS1) | Bike-sharing service operators offer comprehensive and adequate sharing bike rental services to satisfy users’ short-trip service needs. |
Abnormal condition handling (MS2) | Bike-sharing service operators can aid users in handling abnormal rental and use conditions for sharing bike services. |
Ticket-integrated service(MS3) | Bike-sharing operators can offer rental packages or ticket-integrated services to satisfy users’ needs. |
Integrated consulting service (MS4) | Bike-sharing service operators can establish an integrated consulting service center to offer various rentals and use consulting services. |
Main facilities (MF) | |
Bike parking equipment (MF1) | Complete and adequate bike parking equipment can satisfy users’ need for temporary parking. |
Authentication service facilities (MF2) | Automated authentication service facilities can provide convenience for users to finish the personal identification process independently. |
Antitheft and security devices (MF3) | Antitheft and security devices can improve users’ convenience and safety for sharing bike services. |
Self-service facilities (MF4) | Self-service facilities can increase users’ bike rental and independent return convenience. |
Ancillary services (AS) | |
Road rescue service (AS1) | Bike-sharing service operators can provide bike transportation services and recycling of faulty bikes service. |
Bike cycling service (AS2) | Bike-sharing service operators can launch rides bikes integrated with railway/MRT service. |
Mobile application service (AS3) | Bike-sharing operators can develop a mobile application platform to offer bike rental and information posting services. |
Dispatch and maintenance service (AS4) | Bike-sharing service operators can provide simple repair and bike dispatch arranging services at service sites. |
Affiliated equipment (AE) | |
Bike parking equipment (AE1) | Bike-sharing service operators can establish bike parking racks and locks to satisfy the users’ parking needs. |
Lane guidance facilities (AE2) | Lane guidance facilities can aid cyclists in identifying the cycling lane and reducing traffic accidents. |
Bike cycling lanes (AE3) | Bike lanes can reduce vehicle flow conflict with other transport tools and improve cyclists’ safety. |
Bike marking system (AE4) | A complete bike marking system can assist cyclists in evaluating traffic conditions and reducing traffic accidents. |
3. Service Performance Evaluation and Improvement Strategies for PBSSSs
3.1. DEMATEL
- (1)
- Calculating the original average matrix
- (2)
- Calculating the direct influence matrix
- (3)
- Calculating the indirect influence matrix
- (4)
- Evaluating the full influence matrix
- (5)
- Determining the network relation map (NRM)
3.2. PCA (Principal Component Analysis)
3.3. ANP (Analytic Network Process)
- (1)
- Clarify the decision problem and construct the network relationship structure
- (2)
- Design the questionnaire and survey the influence effect
- (3)
- Determine the relative importance of the aspect/criteria using a pairwise comparison
- (4)
- Calculate the transposed and normalized full influence matrix
- (5)
- Calculate the weighted super-matrix
- (6)
- Determine the component weights
3.4. The Modified VIKOR
- (1)
- Define the best value and the worst value of an aspect/component
- (2)
- Calculate the values and , , using the relationships described below.
- (3)
- Calculate the index values , , using the following relationship:
- (4)
- Rank the alternatives
4. Empirical Study of Service Performance for Public Bike-Sharing Service Systems (PBSSSs)
4.1. The Competitive Analysis of Public Bike-Sharing Service Systems (PBSSSs)
4.2. Principal Component Analysis (PCA)
4.3. The Service Satisfaction of PBSSSs Using the VIKOR Approach
- (1)
- Evaluate the aspired level and the worst value
- (2)
- Calculate the and ,
- (3)
- Calculate the value of
- (4)
- Rank the alternatives
4.4. Adoption Path Analysis
4.5. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Liang, J.K.; Eccarius, T.; Lu, C.C. Investigating re-use intentions for shared bicycles: A loyalty phase perspective. Res. Transp. Bus. Manag. 2022, 43, 100696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, J.; Tsai, C.H.; Lin, P.C. Applying spatial-temporal analysis and retail location theory to public bikes site selection in Taipei. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2016, 94, 45–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shen, Y.; Zhang, X.H.; Zhao, J.H. Understanding the usage of dockless bike sharing in Singapore. Int. J. Sustain. Transp. 2018, 12, 686–700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Y.; Wen, H.; Qiu, F.; Wang, Z.; Abbas, H. iBike: Intelligent public bicycle services assisted by data analytics. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2019, 95, 187–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Šurdonja, S.; Giuffrè, T.; Deluka-Tibljaš, A. Smart mobility solutions–necessary precondition for a well-functioning smart city. Transp. Res. Procedia 2020, 45, 604–611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.; Yang, Y.; Wang, J.; Douglas, M.; Su, D. Examining the influence of social norms on orderly parking behavior of dockless bike-sharing users. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2021, 147, 284–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, C.L.; Hsieh, M.S.; Tzeng, G.H. Evaluating vehicle telematics system by using a novel MCDM techniques with dependence and feedback. Expert Syst. Appl. 2010, 37, 6723–6736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, C.L. A novel hybrid decision-making model for determining product position under consideration of dependence and feedback. Appl. Math. Model. 2015, 39, 2194–2216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, C.L.; Shih, Y.H.; Tzeng, G.H.; Yu, H.C. A service selection model for digital music service platforms using a hybrid MCDM approach. Appl. Soft Comput. 2016, 48, 385–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, C.L.; Kuo, C.L. A service position model of package tour services based on the hybrid MCDM approach. Curr. Issues Tour. 2019, 22, 2478–2510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, P.T.; Lin, C.L.; Wu, W.N. Big data management in healthcare: Adoption challenges and implications. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2020, 53, 102078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, C.L. Establishing environment sustentation strategies for urban and rural/town tourism based on a hybrid MCDM approach. Curr. Issues Tour. 2020, 23, 2360–2395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lim, S.S.; Nguyen, H.N.; Lin, C.L. Exploring the Development Strategies of Science Parks Using the Hybrid MCDM Approach. Sustainability 2022, 14, 4351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, C.L.; Kuo, C.L. Establishing Competency Development Evaluation Systems and Talent Cultivation Strategies for the Service Industry Using the Hybrid MCDM Approach. Sustainability 2022, 14, 12280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Milanova, V.; Maas, P. Sharing intangibles: Uncovering individual motives for engagement in a sharing service setting. J. Bus. Res. 2017, 75, 159–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cao, Y.; Shen, D. Contribution of shared bikes to carbon dioxide emission reduction and the economy in Beijing. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2019, 51, 101749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, M.; Liu, H.F.; Yang, H.B. A Deep Learning Based Multi-Block Hybrid Model for Bike-Sharing Supply-Demand Prediction. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 85826–85838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, C.; Kim, I.; Chung, H. The effects of built environment spatial variation on bike-sharing usage: A case study of Suzhou, China. Cities 2021, 110, 103063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boenigk, S.; Möhlmann, M. A Public Sector Marketing Model to Measure the Social and Environmental Values of Public Strategies: An Empirical Study on a Green Public Service. J. Nonprofit Public Sect. Mark. 2016, 28, 85–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rong, K.; Xiao, F.; Wang, Y. Redundancy in the sharing economy. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2019, 151, 104455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lyu, Y.; Cao, M.; Zhang, Y.; Yang, T.; Shi, C. Investigating users’ perspectives on the development of bike-sharing in Shanghai. Res. Transp. Bus. Manag. 2021, 40, 100543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ma, G.; Zhang, B.; Shang, C.; Shen, Q. Rebalancing stochastic demands for bike-sharing networks with multi-scenario characteristics. Inf. Sci. 2021, 554, 177–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, W.; Kamargianni, M. Providing quantified evidence to policy makers for promoting bike-sharing in heavily air-polluted cities: A mode choice model and policy simulation for Taiyuan-China. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2018, 111, 277–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, S.Y. Eco-friendly value or others’ environmental norms? Arguing the environmental using psychology of bike-sharing for the general public. Transp. Lett.-Int. J. Transp. Res. 2019, 11, 425–435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chang, X.; Wu, J.; He, Z.; Li, D.; Sun, H.; Wang, W. Understanding user’s travel behavior and city region functions from station-free shared bike usage data. Transp. Res. Part F Traffic Psychol. Behav. 2020, 72, 81–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shi, X.; Li, Z.; Xia, E. The impact of ride-hailing and shared bikes on public transit: Moderating effect of the legitimacy. Res. Transp. Econ. 2021, 85, 100870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, X.Y.; Huang, D.; Li, Z.Y. Examining relationships among perceived benefit, tourist experience and satisfaction: The context of intelligent sharing bicycle. Asia Pac. J. Tour. Res. 2018, 23, 437–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, J.; Lindsey, G. Do new bike share stations increase member use: A quasi-experimental study. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2019, 121, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Benedini, D.J.; Lavieri, P.S.; Strambi, O. Understanding the use of private and shared bicycles in large emerging cities: The case of Sao Paulo, Brazil. Case Stud. Transp. Policy 2020, 8, 564–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abdellaoui Alaoui, E.A.; Koumetio Tekouabou, S.C. Intelligent management of bike sharing in smart cities using machine learning and Internet of Things. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2021, 67, 102702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hori, S.; Shimizu, Y. Designing methods of human interface for supervisory control systems. Control Eng. Pract. 1999, 7, 1413–1419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Seyed-Hosseini, S.M.; Safaei, N.; Asgharpour, M.J. Reprioritization of failures in a system failure mode and effects analysis by decision making trial and evaluation laboratory technique. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 2006, 91, 872–881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tzeng, G.H.; Chiang, C.H.; Li, C.W. Evaluating intertwined effects in e-learning programs: A novel hybrid MCDM model based on factor analysis and DEMATEL. Expert Syst. Appl. 2007, 32, 1028–1044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liou, J.J.H.; Yen, L.; Tzeng, G.H. Building an effective safety management system for airlines. J. Air Transp. Manag. 2008, 14, 20–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, C.L.; Tzeng, G.H. A value-created system of science (technology) park by using DEMATEL. Expert Syst. Appl. 2009, 36, 9683–9697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, W.W.; Lan, L.W.; Lee, Y.T. Exploring decisive factors affecting an organization’s SaaS adoption: A case study. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2011, 31, 556–563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, W.C.; Lin, Y.H.; Lin, C.L.; Chung, C.H.; Lee, M.T. DEMATEL-based model to improve the performance in a matrix organization. Expert Syst. Appl. 2012, 39, 4978–4986. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, C.H.; Tzeng, G.H.; Lee, M.H. Strategies for improving cruise product sales using hybrid ‘multiple criteria decision making’ models. Serv. Ind. J. 2013, 33, 542–563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, W.C.; Lin, C.L.; Wang, S.H.; Liu, J.J.; Lee, M.T. Application of importance-satisfaction analysis and influence-relations map to evaluate design delay factors. J. Civ. Eng. Manag. 2014, 20, 497–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Uygun, O.; Kacamak, H.; Kahraman, U.A. An integrated DEMATEL and Fuzzy ANP techniques for evaluation and selection of outsourcing provider for a telecommunication company. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2015, 86, 137–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hu, K.H.; Wei, J.G.; Tzeng, G.H. Risk Factor Assessment Improvement for China’s Cloud Computing Auditing Using a New Hybrid MADM Model. Int. J. Inf. Technol. Decis. Mak. 2017, 16, 737–777. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Govindan, K.; Shankar, M.; Kannan, D. Supplier selection based on corporate social responsibility practices. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2018, 200, 353–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ferrell, O.C.; Harrison, D.E.; Ferrell, L.; Hair, J.F. Business ethics, corporate social responsibility, and brand attitudes: An exploratory study. J. Bus. Res. 2019, 95, 491–501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, C.L. The analysis of sustainable development strategies for industrial tourism based on IOA-NRM approach. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 241, 118281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fang, I.C.; Chen, P.T.; Chiu, H.H.; Lin, C.L.; Su, F.C. Establishing the Digital Transformation Strategies for the Med-Tech Enterprises Based on the AIA-NRM Approach. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 7574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ocampo, L.; Yamagishi, K. Modeling the lockdown relaxation protocols of the Philippine government in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: An intuitionistic fuzzy DEMATEL analysis. Socio-Econ. Plan. Sci. 2020, 72, 100911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chang, S.C.; Chang, H.H.; Lu, M.T. Evaluating Industry 4.0 Technology Application in SMEs: Using a Hybrid MCDM Approach. Mathematics 2021, 9, 414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, C.L. Evaluating the urban sustainable development strategies and common suited paths considering various stakeholders. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2022, 24, 14033–14073. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chang, J.J.; Chen, R.F.; Lin, C.L. Exploring the Driving Factors of Urban Music Festival Tourism and Service Development Strategies Using the Modified SIA-NRM Approach. Sustainability 2022, 14, 7498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chang, J.J.; Lin, C.L. Establishing Urban Revitalization and Regional Development Strategies with Consideration of Urban Stakeholders Based on the ISA-NRM Approach. Sustainability 2022, 14, 7230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Niemira, M.P.; Saaty, T.L. An Analytic Network Process model for financial-crisis forecasting. Int. J. Forecast. 2004, 20, 573–587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Blair, A.R.; Nachtmann, R.; Saaty, T.L.; Whitaker, R. Forecasting the resurgence of the US economy in 2001: An expert judgment approach. Socio-Econ. Plan. Sci. 2002, 36, 77–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Saaty, T.L. Rank from comparisons and from ratings in the analytic hierarchy/network processes. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2006, 168, 557–570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chang, C.W.; Wu, C.R.; Lin, C.T.; Lin, H.L. Evaluating digital video recorder systems using analytic hierarchy and analytic network processes. Inf. Sci. 2007, 177, 3383–3396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, J.L.; Chiu, H.N.; Tzeng, G.H.; Yeh, R.H. Vendor selection by integrated fuzzy MCDM techniques with independent and interdependent relationships. Inf. Sci. 2008, 178, 4166–4183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yüksel, İ.; Dağdeviren, M. Using the analytic network process (ANP) in a SWOT analysis-A case study for a textile firm. Inf. Sci. 2007, 177, 3364–3382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Opricovic, S.; Tzeng, G.H. Multicriteria planning of post-earthquake sustainable reconstruction. Comput.-Aided Civ. Infrastruct. Eng. 2002, 17, 211–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Opricovic, S.; Tzeng, G.H. Defuzzification within a multicriteria decision model. Int. J. Uncertain. Fuzziness Knowl.-Based Syst. 2003, 11, 635–652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Opricovic, S.; Tzeng, G.H. Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2004, 156, 445–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Opricovic, S.; Tzeng, G.H. Extended VIKOR method in comparison with outranking methods. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2007, 178, 514–529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tzeng, G.H.; Lin, C.W.; Opricovic, S. Multi-criteria analysis of alternative-fuel buses for public transportation. Energy Policy 2005, 33, 1373–1383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tzeng, G.H.; Teng, M.H.; Chen, J.J.; Opricovic, S. Multicriteria selection for a restaurant location in Taipei. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2002, 21, 171–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tzeng, G.H.; Tsaur, S.H.; Laiw, Y.D.; Opricovic, S. Multicriteria analysis of environmental quality in Taipei: Public preferences and improvement strategies. J. Environ. Manag. 2002, 65, 109–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kamgar-Parsi, B.; Kamgar-Parsi, B. On problem solving with Hopfield neural networks. Biol. Cybern. 1990, 62, 415–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abe, S.; Kawakami, J.; Hirasawa, K. Solving inequality constrained combinatorial optimization problems by the hopfield neural networks. Neural Netw. 1992, 5, 663–670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, W.L.; Xu, X.L.; Wu, Q.D. Hopfield neural networks approach for job shop scheduling problems. In Proceedings of the 2003 IEEE International Symposium on Intelligent Control, Houston, TX, USA, 8 October 2003; pp. 935–940. [Google Scholar]
- Arbi, A.; Aouiti, C.; Touati, A. Uniform Asymptotic Stability and Global Asymptotic Stability for Time-Delay Hopfield Neural Networks. In Artificial Intelligence Applications and Innovations: 2012; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2012; pp. 483–492. [Google Scholar]
- Sabir, Z.; Raja, M.A.Z.; Alhazmi, S.E.; Gupta, M.; Arbi, A.; Baba, I.A. Applications of artificial neural network to solve the nonlinear COVID-19 mathematical model based on the dynamics of SIQ. J. Taibah Univ. Sci. 2022, 16, 874–884. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Aspects | MS | MF | AS | AE | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Main services (MS) | 0.000 | 2.838 | 2.641 | 2.725 | 8.204 |
Main facilities (MF) | 2.880 | 0.000 | 2.641 | 2.648 | 8.169 |
Ancillary services (AS) | 2.746 | 2.563 | 0.000 | 2.585 | 7.894 |
Affiliated equipment (AE) | 2.577 | 2.585 | 2.577 | 0.000 | 7.739 |
Total | 8.204 | 7.986 | 7.859 | 7.958 | - |
Aspects | MS | MF | AS | AE | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Main services (MS) | 0.000 | 0.346 | 0.322 | 0.332 | 1.000 |
Main facilities (MF) | 0.351 | 0.000 | 0.322 | 0.323 | 0.996 |
Ancillary services (AS) | 0.335 | 0.312 | 0.000 | 0.315 | 0.962 |
Affiliated equipment (AE) | 0.314 | 0.315 | 0.314 | 0.000 | 0.943 |
Total | 1.000 | 0.973 | 0.958 | 0.970 | - |
Aspects | Sum of Row | Sum of Column | Sum of Row and Column | Importance of Influence |
---|---|---|---|---|
Main services (MS) | 1.000 | 1.000 | 2.000 | 1 |
Main facilities (MF) | 0.996 | 0.973 | 1.969 | 2 |
Ancillary services (AS) | 0.962 | 0.958 | 1.920 | 3 |
Affiliated equipment (AE) | 0.943 | 0.970 | 1.913 | 4 |
Aspects | MS | MF | AS | AE | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Main services (MS) | 10.116 | 9.826 | 9.716 | 9.806 | 39.464 |
Main facilities (MF) | 9.997 | 9.887 | 9.689 | 9.783 | 39.357 |
Ancillary services (AS) | 9.741 | 9.555 | 9.512 | 9.528 | 38.336 |
Affiliated equipment (AE) | 9.600 | 9.407 | 9.292 | 9.458 | 37.756 |
Total | 39.454 | 38.674 | 38.210 | 38.575 | - |
Aspects | MS | MF | AS | AE | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Main services (MS) | 10.116 | 10.172 | 10.038 | 10.138 | 40.464 |
Main facilities (MF) | 10.348 | 9.887 | 10.011 | 10.106 | 40.353 |
Ancillary services (AS) | 10.076 | 9.867 | 9.512 | 9.843 | 39.298 |
Affiliated equipment (AE) | 9.914 | 9.722 | 9.606 | 9.458 | 38.699 |
Total | 40.454 | 39.647 | 39.168 | 39.545 | - |
Aspects | {di} | {ri} | {di + ri} | {di − ri} |
---|---|---|---|---|
Main services (MS) | 40.464 | 40.454 | 80.918 | 0.010 |
Main facilities (MF) | 40.353 | 39.647 | 80.000 | 0.706 |
Ancillary services (AS) | 39.298 | 39.168 | 78.465 | 0.130 |
Affiliated equipment (AE) | 38.699 | 39.545 | 78.244 | −0.845 |
Aspects | MS | MF | AS | AE |
---|---|---|---|---|
Main services (MS) | - | |||
Main facilities (MF) | 0.177 | - | ||
Ancillary services (AS) | 0.037 | −0.145 | - | |
Affiliated equipment (AE) | −0.224 | −0.384 | −0.237 | - |
Aspects | MS | MF | AS | AE |
---|---|---|---|---|
Main services (MS) | 0.250 | 0.256 | 0.256 | 0.256 |
Main facilities (MF) | 0.251 | 0.245 | 0.251 | 0.251 |
Ancillary services (AS) | 0.248 | 0.248 | 0.242 | 0.248 |
Affiliated equipment (AE) | 0.251 | 0.250 | 0.250 | 0.244 |
Total | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 |
Aspects | MS | MF | AS | AE |
---|---|---|---|---|
Main services (MS) | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 |
Main facilities (MF) | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 |
Ancillary services (AS) | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 |
Affiliated equipment (AE) | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 |
Total | 4.000 | 4.000 | 4.000 | 4.000 |
Aspects | MS | MF | AS | AE |
---|---|---|---|---|
Main services (MS) | 0.250 | 0.256 | 0.256 | 0.256 |
Main facilities (MF) | 0.251 | 0.245 | 0.251 | 0.251 |
Ancillary services (AS) | 0.248 | 0.248 | 0.242 | 0.248 |
Affiliated equipment (AE) | 0.251 | 0.250 | 0.250 | 0.244 |
Total | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 |
Aspects | MS | MF | AS | AE |
---|---|---|---|---|
Main services (MS) | 0.255 | 0.255 | 0.255 | 0.255 |
Main facilities (MF) | 0.250 | 0.250 | 0.250 | 0.250 |
Ancillary services (AS) | 0.247 | 0.247 | 0.247 | 0.247 |
Affiliated equipment (AE) | 0.249 | 0.249 | 0.249 | 0.249 |
Total | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 |
Aspects | Components | Weight |
---|---|---|
Main services (MS) | Exception handling and service (MSP1) | 0.255 |
Main facilities (MF) | Certification and security facility (MFP1) | 0.250 |
Ancillary services (AS) | Dispatch and rescue service (ASP1) | 0.247 |
Affiliated equipment (AE) | Guidance and marking facilities (AEP1) | 0.249 |
Total | 1.000 |
Users Aspects | Work Commuter Cyclists (Style 1) | Short-Trip Connection Cyclists (Style 2) | Travel and Leisure Cyclists (Style 3) |
---|---|---|---|
Horizontal analysis (0~10) | |||
Main services (MS) | 4.794 (3) | 6.176 (2) | 6.417 (1) |
Main facilities (MF) | 4.735 (3) | 6.063 (2) | 6.319 (1) |
Ancillary services (AS) | 4.221 (3) | 5.782 (2) | 6.245 (1) |
Affiliated equipment (AE) | 4.706 (3) | 5.863 (2) | 6.333 (1) |
Vertical analysis (0~10) | |||
Main services (MS) | 4.794 (1) | 6.176 (1) | 6.417 (1) |
Main facilities (MF) | 4.735 (2) | 6.063 (2) | 6.319 (3) |
Ancillary services (AS) | 4.221 (4) | 5.782 (4) | 6.245 (4) |
Affiliated equipment (AE) | 4.706 (3) | 5.863 (3) | 6.333 (2) |
Components | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Aspects | Components | Criteria | Community | |
Main services (MS) | Exception handling and integrated service (MSP1) | Abnormal condition handling (MS2) | 0.947 | 0.897 |
Integrated consulting service (MS4) | 0.916 | 0.840 | ||
Ticket integrated service (MS3) | 0.914 | 0.835 | ||
Bike rental services (MS1) | 0.901 | 0.811 | ||
Eigenvalue λ | 3.382 | |||
% of Variance | 84.560 | |||
Cumulative (%) | 84.560 | |||
Cronbach’s α | 0.939 | |||
Main facilities (MF) | Certification and security facility (MFP1) | Authentication service facilities (MF2) | 0.959 | 0.919 |
Antitheft and security device (MF3) | 0.946 | 0.895 | ||
Self-service facilities (MF4) | 0.925 | 0.856 | ||
Bike parking equipment (MF1) | 0.919 | 0.845 | ||
Eigenvalue λ | 3.514 | |||
% of Variance | 87.857 | |||
Cumulative (%) | 87.857 | |||
Cronbach’s α | 0.954 | |||
Ancillary services (AS) | Dispatch and rescue service (ASP1) | Dispatch and maintenance service (AS4) | 0.958 | 0.919 |
Bike cycling service (AS2) | 0.939 | 0.882 | ||
Road rescue service (AS1) | 0.934 | 0.873 | ||
Mobile application service (AS3) | 0.915 | 0.836 | ||
Eigenvalue λ | 3.510 | |||
% of Variance | 87.755 | |||
Cumulative (%) | 87.755 | |||
Cronbach’s α | 0.953 | |||
Affiliated equipment (AE) | Guidance and marking facilities (AEP1) | Lane guidance facilities (AE2) | 0.969 | 0.939 |
Bike marking system (AE4) | 0.958 | 0.917 | ||
Bike cycling lanes (AE3) | 0.957 | 0.916 | ||
Bike parking equipment (AE1) | 0.880 | 0.774 | ||
Eigenvalue λ | 3.545 | |||
% of Variance | 88.623 | |||
Cumulative (%) | 88.623 | |||
Cronbach’s α | 0.957 |
Aspects | Weight | Work Commuter Cyclists | Short-Trip Connection Cyclists | Travel and Leisure Cyclists | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Styles | Style 1 | Style 2 | Style 3 | |||
Main services (MS) | 0.255 | 4.794 | 6.176 | 6.417 | 10 | 0 |
Main facilities (MF) | 0.250 | 4.735 | 6.063 | 6.319 | 10 | 0 |
Ancillary services (AS) | 0.247 | 4.221 | 5.782 | 6.245 | 10 | 0 |
Affiliated equipment (AE) | 0.249 | 4.706 | 5.863 | 6.333 | 10 | 0 |
Aspects | Weight | Work Commuter Cyclists | Short-Trip Connection Cyclists | Travel and Leisure Cyclists |
---|---|---|---|---|
Style 1 | Style 2 | Style 3 | ||
Main services (MS) | 0.255 | 0.521 | 0.382 | 0.358 |
Main facilities (MF) | 0.250 | 0.526 | 0.394 | 0.368 |
Ancillary services (AS) | 0.247 | 0.578 | 0.422 | 0.375 |
Affiliated equipment (AE) | 0.249 | 0.529 | 0.414 | 0.367 |
Sk | 0.538 | 0.403 | 0.367 | |
Qk | 0.578 | 0.422 | 0.375 |
v | Work Commuter Cyclists | Short-Trip Connection Cyclists | Travel and Leisure Cyclists |
---|---|---|---|
Style 1 | Style 2 | Style 3 | |
0.00 | 0.578 | 0.422 | 0.375 |
0.10 | 0.574 | 0.420 | 0.375 |
0.20 | 0.570 | 0.418 | 0.374 |
0.30 | 0.566 | 0.416 | 0.373 |
0.40 | 0.562 | 0.414 | 0.372 |
0.50 | 0.558 | 0.412 | 0.371 |
0.60 | 0.554 | 0.410 | 0.370 |
0.70 | 0.550 | 0.408 | 0.370 |
0.80 | 0.546 | 0.407 | 0.369 |
0.90 | 0.542 | 0.405 | 0.368 |
1.00 | 0.538 | 0.403 | 0.367 |
v | Styles | Work Commuter Cyclists | Short-Trip Connection Cyclists | Travel and Leisure Cyclists |
---|---|---|---|---|
Style 1 | Style 2 | Style 3 | ||
v = 0.0 | V(Rk) | 0.578 | 0.422 | 0.375 |
CSI (1 − Rk) | 0.422 | 0.578 | 0.625 | |
Rank | 3 | 2 | 1 | |
v = 0.5 | V(Rk) | 0.558 | 0.412 | 0.371 |
CSI (1 − Rk) | 0.442 | 0.588 | 0.629 | |
Rank | 3 | 2 | 1 | |
v = 1.0 | V(Rk) | 0.538 | 0.403 | 0.367 |
CSI (1 − Rk) | 0.462 | 0.597 | 0.633 | |
Rank | 3 | 2 | 1 |
Work Commuter Cyclists (Style 1) |
---|
Main services (MS) (1) > Main facilities (MF) (2) > Affiliated equipment (AE) (3) > Ancillary services (AS) (4) |
Available paths |
1. MF (2) → AE (3) {Y} 2. MF (2) → AS (4) → AE (3) {Y} 3. MF (2) → MS (1) → AE (3) {Y} 4. MF (2) → AS (4) → MS (1) → AE (3){Y} |
Adoption paths |
1. Main facilities (MF) → Affiliated equipment (AE) 2. Main facilities (MF) → Ancillary services (AS) → Affiliated equipment (AE) 3. Main facilities (MF) → Main service (MS) → Affiliated equipment (AE) 4. Main facilities (MF) → Ancillary services (AS) → Main service (MS) → Affiliated equipment (AE) |
Short-Trip Connection Cyclists (Style 2) |
---|
Main services (MS) (1) > Main facilities (MF) (2) > Affiliated equipment (AE) (3) > Ancillary services (AS) (4) |
Available paths |
1. MF (2) → AE (3) {Y} 2. MF (2) → AS (4) → AE (3) {Y} 3. MF (2) → MS (1) → AE (3) {Y} 4. MF (2) → AS (4) → MS (1) → AE (3){Y} |
Adoption paths |
1. Main facilities (MF) → Affiliated equipment (AE) 2. Main facilities (MF) → Ancillary services (AS) → Affiliated equipment (AE) 3. Main facilities (MF) → Main service (MS) → Affiliated equipment (AE) 4. Main facilities (MF) → Ancillary services (AS) → Main service (MS) → Affiliated equipment (AE) |
Travel and Leisure Cyclists (Style 3) |
---|
Main services (MS) (1) > Affiliated equipment (AE) (2) > Main facilities (MF)(3) > Ancillary services (AS) (4) |
Available paths |
1. MF (3) → AE (2) {N} 2. MF (3) → AS (4) → AE (2) {Y} 3. MF (3) → MS (1)→AE (2) {Y} 4. MF (3) → AS (4)→MS (1) → AE (2){Y} |
Adoption paths |
2. Main facilities (MF) → Ancillary services (AS) → Affiliated equipment (AE) 3. Main facilities (MF) → Main service (MS) → Affiliated equipment (AE) 4. Main facilities (MF) → Ancillary services (AS) → Main service (MS) → Affiliated equipment (AE) |
Work Commuter Cyclists (Style 1) |
---|
1. Main facilities (MF) → Affiliated equipment (AE) 2. Main facilities (MF) → Ancillary services (AS) → Affiliated equipment (AE) 3. Main facilities (MF) → Main service (MS) → Affiliated equipment (AE) 4. Main facilities (MF) → Ancillary services (AS) → Main service (MS) → Affiliated equipment (AE) |
Short-trip connection cyclists (Style 2) |
1. Main facilities (MF) → Affiliated equipment (AE) 2. Main facilities (MF) → Ancillary services (AS) → Affiliated equipment (AE) 3. Main facilities (MF) → Main service (MS) → Affiliated equipment (AE) 4. Main facilities (MF) → Ancillary services (AS) → Main service (MS) → Affiliated equipment (AE) Travel & leisure cyclists (Style 3) |
2. Main facilities (MF) → Ancillary services (AS) → Affiliated equipment (AE) 3. Main facilities (MF) → Main service (MS) → Affiliated equipment (AE) 4. Main facilities (MF) → Ancillary services (AS) → Main service (MS) → Affiliated equipment (AE) |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Chang, J.-J.; Lin, C.-L. Determining the Sustainable Development Strategies and Adoption Paths for Public Bike-Sharing Service Systems (PBSSSs) under Various Users’ Considerations. Mathematics 2023, 11, 1196. https://doi.org/10.3390/math11051196
Chang J-J, Lin C-L. Determining the Sustainable Development Strategies and Adoption Paths for Public Bike-Sharing Service Systems (PBSSSs) under Various Users’ Considerations. Mathematics. 2023; 11(5):1196. https://doi.org/10.3390/math11051196
Chicago/Turabian StyleChang, Jung-Jung, and Chia-Li Lin. 2023. "Determining the Sustainable Development Strategies and Adoption Paths for Public Bike-Sharing Service Systems (PBSSSs) under Various Users’ Considerations" Mathematics 11, no. 5: 1196. https://doi.org/10.3390/math11051196
APA StyleChang, J.-J., & Lin, C.-L. (2023). Determining the Sustainable Development Strategies and Adoption Paths for Public Bike-Sharing Service Systems (PBSSSs) under Various Users’ Considerations. Mathematics, 11(5), 1196. https://doi.org/10.3390/math11051196