Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 242

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Service Region Design for Urban Electric Vehicle Sharing Systems

Open access
He, Long, Mak, Ho-Yin, Rong, Ying, Shen, Zuo-Jun Max·2017·Manufacturing & Service Operations Management

Abstract

Emerging collaborative consumption business models have shown promise in terms of both generating business opportunities and enhancing the efficient use of resources. In the transportation domain, car-sharing models are being adopted on a mass scale in major metropolitan areas worldwide. This mode of servicized mobility bridges the resource efficiency of public transit and the flexibility of personal transportation. Beyond the significant potential to reduce car ownership, car sharing shows promise in supporting the adoption of fuel-efficient vehicles, such as electric vehicles (EVs), because of these vehicles’ special cost structure with high purchase but low operating costs. Recently, key players in the car-sharing business, such as Autolib’, car2go, and DriveNow, have begun to employ EVs in an operations model that accommodates one-way trips. On the one hand (and particularly in free-floating car sharing), the one-way model results in significant improvements in coverage of travel needs and therefore in adoption potential compared with the conventional round-trip-only model (advocated by Zipcar, for example). On the other hand, this model poses tremendous planning and operational challenges. In this work, we study the planning problem faced by service providers in designing a geographical service region in which to operate the service. This decision entails trade-offs between maximizing customer catchment by covering travel needs and controlling fleet operation costs. We develop a mathematical programming model that incorporates details of both customer adoption behavior and fleet management (including EV repositioning and charging) under imbalanced travel patterns. To address inherent planning uncertainty with regard to adoption patterns, we employ a distributionally robust optimization framework that informs robust decisions to overcome possible ambiguity (or lacking) of data. Mathematically, the problem can be approximated by a mixed integer second-order cone program, which is computationally tractable with practical scale data. Applying this approach to the case of car2go’s service with real operations data, we address a number of planning questions and suggest that there is potential for the future development of this service. The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2016.0611 .

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1287/msom.2016.0611

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 242

Metadata

Authors
He, L., Mak, H.-Y., Rong, Y., & Shen, Z.-J. M.
Venue
Manufacturing & Service Operations Management
Published
2017-05
Volume
19
Issue
2
Pages
309-327
ISSN
  • 1523-4614 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-5498
OpenAlex
W1660348267
Cited by
242
References
2
FWCI
15.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Service Region Design for Urban Electric Vehicle Sharing Systems. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/msom.2016.0611
The paper
He, L., Mak, H.-Y., Rong, Y., & Shen, Z.-J. M. (2017). Service Region Design for Urban Electric Vehicle Sharing Systems. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management. https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2016.0611

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.