Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 74Urban Transport and AccessibilityTransportation and Mobility InnovationsTransportation Planning and Optimization

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 61 of the 63 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Bicycle and Car Share Schemes as Inclusive Modes of Travel? A Socio-Spatial Analysis in Glasgow, UK

Open access
Clark, Julie, Curl, Angela·2016·Social Inclusion
DOI 10.17645/si.v4i3.510
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Public bicycle and car sharing schemes have proliferated in recent years and are increasingly part of the urban transport landscape. Shared transport options have the potential to support social inclusion by improving accessibility: these initiatives could remove some of the barriers to car ownership or bicycle usage such as upfront costs, maintenance and storage. However, the existing evidence base indicates that, in reality, users are most likely to be white, male and middle class. This paper argues that there is a need to consider the social inclusivity of sharing schemes and to develop appropriate evaluation frameworks accordingly. We therefore open by considering ways in which shared transport schemes might be inclusive or not, using a framework developed from accessibility planning. In the second part of the paper, we use the case study of Glasgow in Scotland to undertake a spatial equity analysis of such schemes. We examine how well they serve different population groups across the city, using the locations of bicycle stations and car club parking spaces in Glasgow, comparing and contrasting bike and car. An apparent failure to deliver benefits across the demographic spectrum raises important questions about the socially inclusive nature of public investment in similar schemes.

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 · 10.17645/si.v4i3.510

Cites

61 of 61 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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

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

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Appleyard, D. (1981). Liveable streets. Berkeley, CA: Uni- versity of California Press.
  2. Black, W. (2003). Transportation: A geographical analy- sis. London: The Guildford Press.

Cited by

See all 74

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Clark, J., & Curl, A.
Affiliations
University of Glasgow (GB)
ORCID
Venue
Social Inclusion
Publisher
Cogitatio
Published
2016-06-07
Volume
4
Issue
3
Pages
83-99
ISSN
2183-2803 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.17645/si.v4i3.510
OpenAlex
W2290275811
Cited by
74
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1
FWCI
10.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Social Inclusion (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (submittedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Social Science Open Access Repository (GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • UC Research Repository (University of Canterbury) (submittedVersion)
  • Portuguese National Funding Agency for Science, Research and Technology (RCAAP Project by FCT) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
University of Glasgow
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Transportation › Urban Transport and Accessibility
  • Social Sciences › Transportation › Transportation and Mobility Innovations
  • Social Sciences › Transportation › Transportation Planning and Optimization
Keywords
bike sharing, car sharing, shared mobility, accessibility (transport and spatial geography), spatial equity, socio-spatial analysis, demographic disparities, accessibility planning, evaluation framework, Glasgow

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

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.