Bike sharing: Regulatory options for conflicting interests – Case study Vienna

Bike sharing schemes (BSS) have become popular around the globe. However, new schemes often cause issues due to conflicting interests. In recent years, this was the case with free-floating bike sharing schemes (FFBSS). This paper analyzes the situation of bike sharing (station-based and free-floating) in Vienna with a focus on regulations. Solutions of past problems and present challenges are presented. Additionally, the situation is compared to selected cities around the world (Tianjin, Singapore, Melbourne, Seattle, Amsterdam and Oxford). Expert interviews and literature review present the basis for the case study in Vienna. Information on policies of BSS in other cities has been retrieved from newspaper articles, academic publications and bike sharing regulations. Different types of bike sharing caused different types of issues. The station-based system resolved past problems and needs to be modernized. The mixed system competes with private bikes for space at public bike racks and set up a management system to avoid this problem. FFBSS are mainly concerned with vandalism and illegal parking. The authorities introduced a local police regulation for FFBSS, which caused the operators to withdraw from Vienna. A similar outcome was observed in other cities as well. The cities responded with different regulatory approaches to FFBSS, such as laws, permits and contracts. The approaches vary significantly in duration of implementation. A legal framework is needed to cope with new forms of mobility such as FFBSS. Here, cities can learn from successful station-based schemes that were introduced in close cooperation with governments. Regulations should be set up considering all stakeholders and also ensure that operators do not externalize costs by drawing on public resources.