Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 137
Car-Sharing: Where and How It Succeeds with government agencies, universities, transit properties, employers, and developers. Exhibit 5-1 summarizes the types of people who were inter- viewed. Appendix C lists the names of these partner organizations. Exhibit 5-1 Partner Survey Respondents and Interviewees Survey Interview Type of Partner Organization Respondents Respondents City or county 14 27 Regional Agency 5 2 Public utility 1 State agency 2 1 Rideshare/TDM agency 6 1 University 7 9 Developer/Property manager 2 10 Community/Advocacy group 3 Religious institution 1 Employer 1 6 Transit Agency 11 Consultants to government & developers 2 2 Architect 1 Vehicle/Service provider* 1 Technology service provider* 1 Supermarket 1 Car-share operator* 1 3 TOTAL 49 72 * Note that since the survey was distributed to a wide variety of potential respondents, including via e-mail listserves, not all of these organizations may be the types of partners that are the focus of this chapter. However, their responses are included for the sake of completeness. 5.3 Summary of Survey Results The survey respondents were about evenly divided between describing their partnership with the car-sharing organization as formal or informal. About half of the partner organizations who answered the survey said that the car- sharing organization had initiated the partnership. The same number said that staff at their own organization or another organization had initiated the partnership. The majority reported that their overall understanding of car-sharing, its impacts and economic viability had substantially improved as a result of their participation in the partnership, compared to knowledge they had about car-sharing before they entered into the partnership. Overall, most respondents considered that they now have a good or excellent un- derstanding of key aspects of car-sharing. Exhibits 5-2 and 5-3 summarize these answers. Page 5-3
OCR for page 138
Chapter 5 · The Role of Partners Exhibit 5-2 Who Initiates Car-Sharing Partnerships? Organization Initiating Partnership Number % Car-Sharing Operator 15 41% Staff at Partner Organization 11 30% Staff at Another Organization 4 11% Community/Advocacy Group 1 3% Elected Officials 0 0% Other 3 8% Don't Know 3 8% Total 37* 100% * Twelve organizations did not respond to this question. Exhibit 5-3 Understanding of Car-Sharing Before and After Partnership Total Responses Poor Moderate Good Excellent How would you rate your understanding of... How car-sharing works for example, what car-sharing is, and how it operates? Before the Partnership 38 13% 45% 34% 8% Currently 42 0% 17% 31% 52% Change -13% -28% -3% +44% Where car-sharing is economically viable for example, judging the neighborhoods in which car-sharing is likely to attract members? Before the Partnership 38 32% 37% 29% 3% Currently 42 7% 24% 43% 26% Change -25% -13% +14% +24% The impacts of car-sharing for example on vehicle ownership, vehicle travel and air quality? Before the Partnership 38 21% 50% 24% 5% Currently 42 5% 17% 55% 24% Change -16% -33% +31% +19% Figures may not add up to 100% due to rounding. Types of Support The contributions of partner organizations that were surveyed have ranged from limited--such as, marketing assistance--to substantial--such as, re- duced parking requirements when a residential development incorporates car-sharing. According to the literature search, most of the substantial con- tributions have occurred in Europe, where car-sharing had its roots and is, therefore, more well-established and understood. However, many of these have been taken up and extended by partners in North America, albeit on a more limited scale. Page September 2005 5-4
OCR for page 139
Car-Sharing: Where and How It Succeeds The assistance mentioned by partners in the survey can be broadly sum- marized in the following categories: · Marketing · Administration · Parking · Financial contributions · Memberships · Planning, policy, and tax issues · Transit integration Sections 5.4 through 5.9 describe these categories in detail with extensive examples culled from the survey, the literature search and the partner in- terviews. Attitudes Toward Subsidies of Car-Sharing Seed money can be invaluable in conducting feasibility studies and helping a car-sharing operation get up and running. More than 75% of partners who answered the survey question said that it is appropriate for car-sharing or- ganizations to receive start-up subsidies. Exhibit 5-4 illustrates the partners' opinions about whether car-sharing organizations should receive subsidies, be financially self-sufficient, or treated like any other contracted service. Exhibit 5-4 Partners' Responses on Subsidizing Car-Sharing 35 Slightly 30 Strongly 25 Number of respondents 20 15 10 5 0 Agree Disagree Neither Agree Disagree Neither Agree Disagree Neither It is appropriate for car-sharing Car-sharing organizations need to be Car-sharing should be procured and operators to receive start-up financially self-sufficient, without treated like any other contracted subsidies the need for public funding service Page 5-5
OCR for page 140
Chapter 5 · The Role of Partners Perceived Benefits Survey respondents were asked, "In your opinion, how can car-sharing help further the goals of your organization?" As shown in Exhibit 5-5, most partners see multiple benefits on average, respondents selected more than five options. However, when asked in a follow-up question to choose which of the benefits was the most important for their organization, no clear choice emerged. Number of respondents Exhibit 5-5 Benefits of Car-Sharing 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Reduces parking demand Provides mobility options Improves air quality Reduces vehicle travel Increases transit ridership Provides more affordable transportation options Supports our organization's environmental image Provides a benefit or amenity for our employees Provides a benefit or amenity for our tenants Most important benefit Helps secure development approvals Benefit to our organization Reduces our company/organization's vehicle fleet size Other Survey respondents considered, on balance, that car-sharing had been suc- cessful in helping to achieve their most important goal. However, many were not yet collecting hard data to support this belief. Chapter 7 discusses the various approaches used by respondents to evaluate car-sharing's suc- cess and makes recommendations on quantitative techniques to measure performance. Page September 2005 5-6