Objetivo
1. To identify the best practice in the German schemes and to replicate such schemes in the selected member states taking account of local operational issues of marketing, servicing, insurance and vehicle availability. Social attitudes or barriers and legal issues will also be examined in each participating country.
2. To quantify the transport effects and energy savings made through the present use and potential extension of this mode of transport.
3. To test and refine a level of service model for PAYDC, already developed in the UK, in existing schemes in Germany.
4. To target people at specific life stages, such as elderly people and parents with schools age children, for which PAYDC may have particular application. It can enable elderly people to give up exclusive car ownership at an earlier age; it can reduce the number of school chauffeur runs at peak congestion times.
Update on the project, as at 31 October 1996
1. Key points from the Literature Review.
1.1 Public car systems (now called CarSharing) have been experimented with over the past 25 years mainly in Europe but also USA. Only in the 1990's has this form of car tenure generated viable businesses and co-operatives.
1.2 Commercial CarSharing is an urban phenomenon with dominant participation by people in the 25-40 age group who pay on average 100 ecus for membership, 375 ecus refundable deposit, 12 ecus per month fee, 0.12 ecu per km and 1 ecu per hour for hire. Rural schemes are more informal, co-operative and particularly substitute the second household car and have higher female participation.
1.3 Urban based CarSharing integrates well with bicycle and public transport trips and reduces personal car km from 7,000/yr to 4,050/yr with an increase of 1,540km by public transport (Baum & Pesch 1994). Non-owners did not substantially increase their car mileage as this replaced lifts, borrowed vehicles, taxi or car hire and they combined trips more efficiently.
2. Key points from research into non-participants
2.1 CarSharing is OK, but still needs more professionalism and enterprising spirit.
2.2 Substantial motivation not to participate obviously includes the costs. Limitations in personal mobility are also feared, as well as the associated lack in availability respective to access to cars (no close locations, desired car is unavailable). A noteworthy 50% of the respondents see CarSharing as 'complicated and impractical' as well as 'time consuming'.
2.3 CarSharing is OK, but not available widely enough; it must be less expensive with a better availability of locations; it does not offer enough services for current car owners; it offers 'too much mobility' for non car owners.
2.4 Main hurdles to participation are clearly financial concerns. CarSharing is indeed more cost-efficient than a privately owned car, but on the average still 4 times more expensive than public transport. Those who already own a car are often less aware of its real costs and possible feel CarSharing therefore is more expensive. To dispel unfounded concerns, CarSharing firms must be able to clearly show the financial advantages.
2.5 The second important conclusion of this study makes clear that CarSharing is frequently still felt as a sacrifice, which produces limitations in the personal mobility and/or a higher time expense. If the CarSharing firms succeed in communicating that the undeniable advantages of their system is a gain in mobility, then the market opportunities in the important leisure time area will rise.
3. Key points from research on elderly people
3.1 Elderly CarSharing participants are under represented in the total CarSharing membership.
3.2 Typical characteristics of elderly people already using CarSharing are:
- a very high disposable income
- a high level of education
- an aversion to publicity
- a tendency not to innovate
3.3 These personal characteristics show that under current conditions the potential of elderly CarSharing participants is very limited or at least hard to reach. This is the case out of a general perspective as well as in comparison with other age groups.
3.4 In addition to word of mouth, trial periods and special gifts as well as a high level of customer care would be ways of attracting elderly people into membership.
4. Key points from testing the level of service model.
4.1 Initial runs of the model indicate that 3/4 car clusters are the most efficient because gains after this level are small and more than offset by distance or time members take to reach the cluster of cars.
4.2 The Dortmund CarSharing scheme has collaborated to supply data for the project. Analysis of the February 96 data shows that car use efficiently peaked at 3-car stations.
5. The pilot schemes are in the process of being established in Dublin (IE), Bedford and Edinburgh (UK), Gelderland (NL).
Ámbito científico (EuroSciVoc)
CORDIS clasifica los proyectos con EuroSciVoc, una taxonomía plurilingüe de ámbitos científicos, mediante un proceso semiautomático basado en técnicas de procesamiento del lenguaje natural. Véas: El vocabulario científico europeo..
CORDIS clasifica los proyectos con EuroSciVoc, una taxonomía plurilingüe de ámbitos científicos, mediante un proceso semiautomático basado en técnicas de procesamiento del lenguaje natural. Véas: El vocabulario científico europeo..
Este proyecto aún no se ha clasificado con EuroSciVoc.
Sugiera los ámbitos científicos que considere más relevantes y ayúdenos a mejorar nuestro servicio de clasificación.
Para utilizar esta función, debe iniciar sesión o registrarse
Programa(s)
Programas de financiación plurianuales que definen las prioridades de la UE en materia de investigación e innovación.
Programas de financiación plurianuales que definen las prioridades de la UE en materia de investigación e innovación.
Tema(s)
Las convocatorias de propuestas se dividen en temas. Un tema define una materia o área específica para la que los solicitantes pueden presentar propuestas. La descripción de un tema comprende su alcance específico y la repercusión prevista del proyecto financiado.
Las convocatorias de propuestas se dividen en temas. Un tema define una materia o área específica para la que los solicitantes pueden presentar propuestas. La descripción de un tema comprende su alcance específico y la repercusión prevista del proyecto financiado.
Convocatoria de propuestas
Procedimiento para invitar a los solicitantes a presentar propuestas de proyectos con el objetivo de obtener financiación de la UE.
Datos no disponibles
Procedimiento para invitar a los solicitantes a presentar propuestas de proyectos con el objetivo de obtener financiación de la UE.
Régimen de financiación
Régimen de financiación (o «Tipo de acción») dentro de un programa con características comunes. Especifica: el alcance de lo que se financia; el porcentaje de reembolso; los criterios específicos de evaluación para optar a la financiación; y el uso de formas simplificadas de costes como los importes a tanto alzado.
Régimen de financiación (o «Tipo de acción») dentro de un programa con características comunes. Especifica: el alcance de lo que se financia; el porcentaje de reembolso; los criterios específicos de evaluación para optar a la financiación; y el uso de formas simplificadas de costes como los importes a tanto alzado.
Datos no disponibles
Coordinador
SCARIFF
Irlanda
Los costes totales en que ha incurrido esta organización para participar en el proyecto, incluidos los costes directos e indirectos. Este importe es un subconjunto del presupuesto total del proyecto.