Dynamic Ride-Sharing: Theory and Practice
Publication: Journal of Transportation Engineering
Volume 123, Issue 4
Abstract
Dynamic Ride-sharing (DR) is envisioned as an automated process by which individuals find ride-matches on a trip by trip basis. This paper examines the DR concept on both a theoretical basis and on the basis of actual implementation in Los Angeles. Specifically, the paper investigates the likelihood that the user of a DR system would be successful in finding a ride-match. In a theoretical sense, this paper shows that dynamic ride-sharing is a viable concept. For a congested freeway corridor, the number of trips generated per unit time and space should be sufficient to yield a reasonably large population of potential ride-matches for a DR system. Unfortunately, as demonstrated in the experiment, theory and practice are not the same. Even when individuals share common trip patterns, consummating a ride-match is no easy task for logistical reasons. At best, one might expect a one in five chance of someone offering a ride when trip patterns are similar. This probability would decline for casual trips, and when contacting individuals who have not expressed a prior willingness to carpool.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Behnke, R. W. (1992). “California smart traveler system.”DOT-T-96-16, Federal Transit Administration, Washington, D.C.
2.
Beroldo, S.(1990). “Casual carpooling in the San Francisco Bay Area.”Transp. Q., 44(1), 133–150.
3.
Berry, W. L. (1975). “On the economic incentives for commuter carpooling,” DBA thesis, Harvard University Graduate School of Business Administration, Cambridge, Mass.
4.
Duecker, K., Bair, B., and Levin, I.(1977). “Ride sharing: psychological factors.”Transp. Engrg. J., 103(6), 685–692.
5.
Federal Energy Administration (FEA). (1976). “Carpool incentives: analysis of transportation and energy impacts.” FEA, Washington, D.C.
6.
Ferguson, E. (1990). “An evaluation of employer ride-sharing programs in Southern California.”Transp. Res. Rec. 1280, Transp. Res. Board, Washington, D.C., 59–72.
7.
Flannelly, K. J., and Mcleod, M. S. (1989). “Predicting consumer demand for alternative transportation services among suburban commuters.”Transp. Res. Rec. 1280, Transp. Res. Board, Washington, D.C., 73–81.
8.
Giuliano, G., Hall, R. W., and Golob, J. (1995). “Los Angeles smart traveler field operational test evaluation.”Partners for Advanced Transit and Hwy. Res. Rep. 95-41, University of California, Berkeley, Calif.
9.
Giuliano, G., Hwang, K., Perrine, D., and Wachs, M. (1990). “Preliminary evaluation of regulation XV of the South Coast air quality management district.”Working Paper No. 60, University of California Transportation Center, Berkeley, Calif.
10.
Giuliano, G., Levine, D., and Teal, R.(1990b). “Impact of high occupancy vehicle lanes on carpooling behavior.”Transp., Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 17, 159–177.
11.
Glazer, L. J., and Curry, D. A. (1987). “A ride sharing market analysis survey of commuter attitudes and behavior at a major suburban employment center.”Transp. Res. Rec. 1130, Transp. Res. Board, Washington, D.C., 9–13.
12.
Glazer, J., Koval, A., and Gerard, C. (1986). “Part-time carpooling: a new marketing concept for ridesharing.”Transp. Res. Rec. 1082, Transp. Res. Board, Washington, D.C., 6–15.
13.
Horowitz, A., and Sheth, J. (1978). “Ride sharing to work: an attitudinal analysis.”Transp. Res. Rec. 637, Transp. Res. Board, Washington, D.C., 1–8.
14.
Hwang, K., and Giuliano, G. (1990). “The determinants of ridesharing: literature review.”Working Paper No. 38, University of California Transportation Center, Berkeley, Calif.
15.
Koppelman, F. S, Bhat, C. R., and Schofer, J. L. (1993). “Market research evaluation of actions to reduce suburban traffic congestion: commuter travel behavior and response to demand reduction actions.”Transp. Res., 27A(5), 383–393.
16.
Kornhauser, A. L., Mottola, P., and Stephenson, B. (1977). “Transportation efficiency and the feasibility of dynamic ride sharing.”Transp. Res. Rec. 650, Transp. Res. Board, Washington, D.C., 43–48.
17.
Kowshik, R., Gard, J., Loo, J., Jovanis, P. P., and Kitamura, R. (1993). “Development of user needs and functional requirements for a real-time ridesharing system.”Partners for Advanced Transit and Hwy. Working Paper 93-22, University of California, Berkeley, Calif.
18.
Southworth, F., and Westbrook, F. (1985). “Study of current and planned high occupancy vehicle land use: performance and prospects.”Rep. No. ORNL/TM-9847, United States Department of Energy, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tenn.
19.
Teal, R. F. (1987). “Carpooling: who, how and why.”Transp. Res., 21A(3), 203–214.
20.
United States Department of Transportation (US DOT) and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). (1995). DOT Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) Projects, US DOT and FHWA, Washington, D.C.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Transportation Engineering
Volume 123 • Issue 4 • July 1997
Pages: 308 - 315
Copyright
Copyright © 1997 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Published online: Jul 1, 1997
Published in print: Jul 1997
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.