Report a Comment

I am a little late to this debate because I've been out of town but I will repeat a letter I sent to Capital Bikeshare and posted on this blog about a month ago with my "plan" for an incentive/fee program. Some commenters above have echoed things I mentioned and I think any iteration of a pricing scheme for CaBi will make it more reliable for transportation.

----

I am writing to you as a frequent user of Capital Bikeshare and a huge proponent of the concept. It occurred to me; however, that having full or empty stations is a market failure that properly incentivized could be eliminated. In order to be a successful public transit system, there needs to be some level of reliability for users – confronting full stations at a destination can quickly make a bikeshare trip go from the fastest form of transportation in the city to the most frustrating.

While Bikeshare staff have done an admirable job of bike redistribution, why not rely on users to help make the redistribution more efficient?

In a dense system such as Capital Bikeshare, users are often indifferent with regard to which station they use. However, given a small price incentive users would consider gravitating toward stations that need redistribution. For example: this morning the Dupont Circle station was nearly full and the 20th & Florida station was empty. A slight incentive earlier in the morning would have led users to the Dupont station instead of the 20th & Florida leading to a more even distribution of bikes.

My proposal is as follows:

1) Fee: Each user will have a $0.50 fee added to his account when he:

a. Removes a bicycle from a rack with three or less bicycles

b. Returns a bicycle to a rack with three or less slots

AND

2) Incentive: Each user will have a $0.50 credit added to his account when he:

a. Returns a bicycle to a rack with less than three bicycles

b. Removes a bicycle from a rack with less than three slots

In this scenario, the most that a users’ fee could be would be $1, and conversely the largest credit possible would be $1. Ignoring for a moment the software changes, this small fee would be easy to implement because all users have an account on file which can be credit and debited accordingly. In fact, the system is already set up to charge users on a per-ride basis if they exceed the posted time limits.

A 50c fee would not be considered punitive by most riders, and is in fact far cheaper than any other form of transportation. Furthermore it would be much more likely to be accepted by the bikeshare community if a comparable credit were available for helping return the system to equilibrium.

Who knows, maybe some enterprising riders will have their annual membership paid for by helping return bikes to stations that need them! Having users redistributed bikes will be far cheaper for the system and DDOT than driving employees around in trucks through Washington traffic.

Questions to consider:

* Is 50 cents the right fee? I think 50 cents is enough to shift otherwise indifferent riders without scaring riders away or facing criticism for favoring wealthy riders. Other data may suggest a different amount is more appropriate
* Is 3 bikes the right number? Certainly three bikes at a 14 bike station is a different impact than at a 40 bike megastation. Yet simplicity is key to the system and introducing a percentage-based system could be too complex for the average user. Also, perhaps 2 bikes is a better number than three to set as the threshold. Your user data may give some information about the best way to implement.
* Do daily users who are less familiar with bikeshare pay/receive the same fees? While the system would still be fair if they weren’t eligible for the credit and not subject to the debit – that would defeat the purpose of having bikes redistributed. Yet some may think that introducing such a fee structure could be too confusing for tourists. I think they can handle it.

Whether this approach or another gets implemented I think that introducing market-based pricing to alleviate crowding at stations or shift demand among otherwise indifferent users will help make the whole bikeshare system more efficient without making it too complex. Thank you for your kind consideration.

by Chris on Jun 8, 2011 12:22 pm • link • report