[雙語(yǔ)翻譯]共享單車外文翻譯—共享單車是公共交通的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)者，是替代者，還是補(bǔ)充者？（原文）

1、 REAL CORP 2017 Proceedings/Tagungsband 12-14 September 2017 – http://www.corp.at ISBN 978-3-9504173-2-6 (CD), 978-3-9504173-3-3 (print) Editors: Manfred SCHRENK, Vasily V. POPOVICH, Peter ZEILE, Pietro ELISEI, Clemen

2、s BEYER705 Is Bike Sharing Competitor, Relief or Supplement to Public Transport? Ulrich Leth, Tadej Brezina, Bertram Ludwig, Christina Birett (Graduate Engineer, Ulrich Leth, Research Center of Transport Planning and Tra

3、ffic Engineering, Institute of Transportation, Vienna University of Technology, ulrich.leth@tuwien.ac.at) (Graduate Engineer, Tadej Brezina, Research Center of Transport Planning and Traffic Engineering, Institute of T

4、ransportation, Vienna University of Technology, tadej.brezina@tuwien.ac.at) (Graduate Engineer, Bertram Ludwig, New Urban Mobility Vienna, bertram.ludwig@wienerstadtwerke.at) (Undergraduate Engineer, Christina Birett,

5、 New Urban Mobility Vienna, christina.birett@wienerstadtwerke.at) 1 ABSTRACT In many cities the growing popularity of bicycle-sharing schemes has added additional options to the transport regime. A significant amount o

6、f research has been stipulated by data recorded from lending and returning bicycles at geographically diverse stations. In this contribution, focus will be laid on the relationship that the bike-sharing system of the C

7、ity of Vienna (CityBike Wien – CBW) has with its well developed public transport system. Does bike-sharing serve as competitor, relief or supplement? By surveying the total CBW trip data of 2015 – about 1 million recor

8、ds – we approach to answer this question. We cleanse and route all bicycle trips and compare them with routed alternative public transport trips in terms of travel time ratios. In interviews of 1,389 CBW users conduct

9、ed in July and September/October of 2016, we ask about the purpose of their trip, the position of the CBW as part of their door-to-door trip, the role of CBW as substitute for other means of transport and the reasons f

10、or this substitution. The age group that has the highest number of users among CBW and the shares of tourists/visitors and locals using CBW is identified. Identifying the top 10 of trips from the cleansed dataset and m

11、apping them emphasizes the role that we identify for Vienna’s bike-sharing system in the inner city: A supplement to public transport. Keywords: bike sharing; public transport; relationship; GIS-analysis; questionnaire

12、2 INTRODUCTION On one hand Vienna is known for its long and consistent public transport tradition. On the other hand Vienna started in 2003 its new bicycle sharing system (BSS) CityBike Wien, which now holds 121 statio

13、ns with 3,097 boxes and a fleet of 1,500 bicycles and its know-how was exported throughout the world to other BSS that started later on. As sharing booms, the existence of these new elements, recently added to our urb

14、an transport systems, leads to the question of the role they play. Is bike-sharing a competitor, relief or supplement to other modes of transport that already existed? For the analysis of the question we used a full-ye

15、ar dataset of the BSS City-Bike Wien and the routing engines of Bike City Guide Apps and Wiener Linien public transport operator. The characteristics of BSS have in many aspects already been covered by various studies;

16、 e.g. ranging from urban form’s impact on bicycle flows (Faghih-Imani, Eluru, El-Geneidy, Rabbat, & Haq, 2014) via typologies of users (M. Vogel et al., 2014) to the impacts of BSS on health (Woodcock, Tainio, Ches

17、hire, O'Brien, & Goodman, 2014). In an example for previous research Beecham and Wood conducted analysis of spatial data compared to BSS usage data for London. Their findings concentrated on different usage pat

18、terns in comparison of female to male users. Furthermore even detailed analysis of characterizations for groups such as postwork or lunchtime trips is possible. (R. Beecham & J. D. Wood, 2014) Another issue is the

19、future development outlook of CBW. Possible answers are extending or concentrating the CBW system in Vienna. 3 METHODS 3.1 Survey To get to know how the people use CBW and for which kinds of purposes, we conducted a

20、survey in July and September/October 2016 by interviewing CBW users, while they were borrowing out or bringing back Ulrich Leth, Tadej Brezina, Bertram Ludwig, Christina Birett REAL CORP 2017 Proceedings/Tagungsband 12

21、-14 September 2017 – http://www.corp.at ISBN 978-3-9504173-2-6 (CD), 978-3-9504173-3-3 (print) Editors: Manfred SCHRENK, Vasily V. POPOVICH, Peter ZEILE, Pietro ELISEI, Clemens BEYER707 substitutes PT trips with a shar

22、e of 60 % as main means of transport and 64% as connector to other modes of transportation. Reasons for substitution are exercise, cheaper and faster compared to PT, faster compared to walking and more eco friendly co

23、mpared to car use (figure 4). Is the argument of more environmental friendliness of CBW compared to cars related to collegiate users? The results indicate that it probably is. 15%6%5%2%2%5%65%0%Purpose of CBW trips (20

24、16, n=1,413)work (n=215)education (n=88)errands (n=73)accompany sb. (n=31)on official business (n=29)shopping (n=65)leisure (n=909)other (n=3)Fig.1. Purpose of CBW trips 05001,0001,5002,0002,500by foot own bike PT own ca