About Bike Share Programs

History

The story of Bike-Share systems is an evolutionary one. Beginning as a humble collection of bikes congregated for the public use, these programs have become complex, multifaceted mechanisms of public mass transport. The first Bike Share program was launched in 1968 in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. This system known as “White Bikes” was initiated by a resident with assistance from local administration. Another program was soon attempted in Milan, Italy. However, these primitive systems were plagued by theft and vandalism. Many donated bicycles were kept (instead of returned to public spaces) or thrown into canals. These programs had no sense of reliability or user accountability. This “first generation” of Bike Share program was also attempted in the United States decades later; beginning in the 1990s, Portland, OR, Minneapolis, MN, Boulder, CO, and Princeton, NJ. One organizer noted, “We’ll usually set several hundred recycled bikes in early summer. By the end, there are very few left.” Over time, these programs needed to modify their practices to remain active.

A “second generation” system was marked in 1995 by the launching of a Bike Share program in Copenhagen, Denmark. Founded by Niels and Wilhelm Christiansen with 1100 bikes, the program was the first to involve strategically placed hubs, each with a map of the system, with coin-operated locking mechanisms. This required the user to deposit money to remove the bike, and then return it to the same place to retrieve it. This program still had a significant amount of theft because of the relatively small amount of money deposited to release a bike. The Copenhagen program attempted to counteract theft by using bikes that looked different, required special tools to disassemble, and had incompatible parts with traditional bikes. The custom-made bikes were designed for durability and comfort, not speed (they had solid rubber tires to counter the risk of flat tires) as well as an adjustable seat post with a stopper. Despite some problems, the Copenhagen program is still active.

With the increased sophistication and commercialization of bicycle programs, a “third generation” system evolved that dealt better with security and funding problems that troubled earlier programs. Known as bike libraries, these systems operated much like their literary counterparts. With a magnetic stripe card, program members check out a bike at hubs distributed around an urban area. This was the first iteration of bike programs to involve the recording of personal information. Recently, European-based companies Adshel and Depo have created entire bike-share system offerings to municipalities in which they donate and operate the hardware for the system in return for advertising rights and a large chunk of the profits. Although seen as a complement to public transit, few previous Bike Share programs centered around integration with other transit services.

The “fourth generation,” systems which are still in planning include programs in three Washington, D.C. area cities: Annapolis, MD, Alexandria, VA, and Arlington, VA. These communities are planning on integrating community bike share programs with the SmarTrip card offered by the WMATA (DC Metro), used for subway and bus transportation.

Case for Bike Share

Bike Share programs are attractive for three reasons. These systems complement more common forms of public transit, private vehicular transportation, and pedestrian activity in increasing access and mobility. Also, such programs are a part of a necessary shift away from dependency on fossil fuels for transportation and towards more sustainable solutions. Bike sharing can also be an innovative way of promoting exercise without requiring significant lifestyle changes.

Mobility is the ability freely move about in a given space. In terms of human transportation, motorized vehicles (public transit and private vehicles) provide increased mobility over longer distances than non-motorized transportation (bicycles and walking), while the opposite is true for shorter distances. This is complicated by increasing congestion in urban America due to car ownership outstripping population growth and vehicular facilities construction. Access, conversely is the ability to actually reach a destination. The goal therefore of Bike Share programs in urbanized areas is to sustain public access for a broad community in an increasingly congested environment by bridging the gap between distances best served by vehicular and foot transportation. Bicycles provide on-demand transport that allows the user to reach locations not easily or efficiently accessible by other forms of transportation. In urban environments, bikes are often the best way to move around, especially if you are short on time and money.

A second consideration in the case for Bike Share programs is the role they take in promoting sustainable energy use and improving the quality of urban life. Vehicular transportation is a significant source of greenhouse gas emissions. With increased rates of car ownership common around the world and decreasing levels of fuel efficiency (especially in the United States), there are greater threats to the preservation of current standards of living. Sustainability is a complex, multi-disciplinary challenge that strives to reconcile rapid growth with limited resources. A decreased dependence on private vehicular modes of transportation is integral to “Smart Growth” plans and transit-oriented development, two goals of modern urban planning. Exercise plays a critical role in health and stress management. Bike Share programs allow people to efficiently integrate exercise into people’s lives while they commute to work or out to eat. Daily bike use is a refreshing alternative to the generally sedentary modern lifestyle.