Habitat International 53 (2016) 188e194

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Habitat International
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/habitatint

How accessible and convenient are the public bicycle sharing

programs in China? Experiences from Suzhou city
Tej Kumar Karki a, *, Liu Tao b
a
MIT-UTM Malaysian Sustainable Cities Program, Boston, USA and JB, Malaysia
b
University of Liverpool, UK

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Many cities in China have implemented public bicycle sharing programs as a strategy to promote low-
Received 26 July 2015 carbon transportation policy. Suzhou is one of them. Today, 12,840 bicycles are in operation in 548 bi-
Received in revised form cycle docking stations in the city. This research investigates how accessible and convenient the Suzhou
5 November 2015
bicycle sharing program is to those who are marginalized and have low income, less education and rely
Accepted 12 November 2015
Available online 7 December 2015
on irregular and low paid jobs, and what could be done to improve the accessibility and quality of the
service. Since no studies have been carried out on the Suzhou public bicycle sharing program, this study
is the first to make a contribution on the subject. The results showed that very few females, low-income
Keywords:
Public bicycle sharing program
migrant workers and less-educated people were taking advantages of the program. Most bicycle users
Zero-carbon transportation policy reported that the bicycle docking stations were inconveniently located and bicycle parking slots were not
Bicycle rental system available when needed in the stations. This warrants making the program more accessible and conve-
Non-motorized transport nient to the weaker section of the society through bottom-up participatory planning process.
Healthy transportation alternative © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Bicycle ownership in China dropped sharply in the mid-1990s
with the rise of income, surge in automobiles and expansion of
highways (Zhang, Shaheen, & Chen, 2014). China is already the
number one in CO2 emission in the world, and number two in terms
of the volume of gasoline imports (Wang, Teter, & Sperling, 2011).
Automobiles contributed to 25 percent of the PM2.5 emissions in
Beijing in 2013 (Xinhua, 2013). Lung cancer rose from 18 to 28
percent in Beijing between 1997 and 2003 (Li, 2009). Many other
cities are on the verge of a similar situation, and public frustrations
about urban air pollution are on the rise. The Chinese government
took note of this problem in 2011 and set a target to reduce carbon
emissions per unit of GDP by 17 percent by 2015 (The National
Development and Reform Commission of the People's Republic of
China, 2012). Concurrently, the Ministry of Transport initiated a
public bicycle sharing program (PBSP) as one of the strategies to
meet the target. This paper evaluates the PBSP implemented in
Suzhou, China in 2010. It investigates how accessible and conve-
nient the Suzhou bicycle sharing program is to those who are weak,
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: tejkarki@gmail.com (T.K. Karki), tao.liu@gmail.com (L. Tao).
have less income, less education and rely on irregular and low paid
jobs, and what could be done to improve the accessibility and
quality of the service. Answering these questions could provide
valuable insights to policymakers interested in making the bicycle
sharing program more accessible and popular to the general public
in China. The paper is organized as follows. First it introduces what
the PBSP is. Second, it presents previous studies on the PBSP. Third,
it explains the focus and purpose of this research. Fourth, it pre-
sents the research method. Fifth, it briefly introduces Suzhou city's
PBSP. Sixth, it presents results and discussion. Seventh, it lays out
policy recommendations followed by conclusions.
2. What is the PBSP?
PBSP is a short term urban bicycle rental scheme for traveling
within a city from one docking station to another (Fishman,
Washington, & Haworth, 2013; New York City Department of City
Planning, 2009). It is convenient for short distance commuting for
the ‘last mile’ trip, from home to a transit station, from work to a
transit station and vice versa (Shaheen, Guzman, & Zhang, 2010). To
use the PBSP bicycle, one needs to register and own a PBSP e-card.
Once the card is tapped on the docking pole in a bicycle docking
station (BDS) the bicycle is released from the pole for use. The same
methods must be adopted when returning the bicycle to any

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2015.11.007
0197-3975/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 T.K. Karki, L. Tao / Habitat International 53 (2016) 188e194
docking station. A rider is freed from liability for the bicycle once it
is parked in the docking station after use (Shaheen et al., 2010). In
North America and Europe, the first 30 min are free and for every
subsequent 30-min period a fee is charged (Shaheen, Martin,
Cohen, & Finson, 2012). In most Chinese bicycle sharing pro-
grams, the first hour is free and after that a fee is charged for every
additional hour.
The PBSP helps people to move from one transit station to
another and enhances connections with other public transit modes
(DeMaio, 2009). Shaheen et al. (2010), see the benefits of bicycle
sharing to be a flexible choice of mobility, helping to reduce
emissions, helping people to be physically active and healthy,
reducing congestion and the use of fossil fuel, and offering rela-
tively cheaper transportation option. Bicycle sharing could provide
the ‘last mile ride’ opportunity to working populations and
migrant-workers who commute daily from their residents to the
public-transit or to construction sites, and vice versa.
The first generation of the bicycle sharing program began in
1960 in Amsterdam under the name “White Bicycle Program”
(METROLINX, 2009). White painted bicycles were placed in
different parts of city for free use. It was assumed that one could
ride a bicycle up to his or her destination, leave it there, and the
next person can use it for their own purpose (DeMaio, 2009).
However, people did not use the bicycles as expected. Some took
the bicycle home for their personal use; others threw them into the
canals and ultimately the program failed. A second generation of
bicycle sharing was attempted in 1995 in Copenhagen, Denmark.
Under this scheme, people could use a bicycle from the designated
bicycle stations in downtown Copenhagen with a coin deposit. The
program was operated by a non-profit organization (DeMaio,
2009). At the designated stations one could unlock the bicycles
for use with a 20 Danish Krone (US $3) (Shaheen et al., 2010). The
program had 1100 colored bicycles in operation in the city. How-
ever, this program had two weaknesses. First, there was no time
limit for use. As a result people occupied the bicycles for a pro-
longed duration. Some of them never returned the bicycle
(Shaheen et al., 2010). Second, because of the anonymity of the
bicycle user, many bicycles were stolen and vandalized.
Next, third generation PBSPs were invented to avoid bicycle
theft. In this generation, the riders were required to register with
the bicycle program, pay a deposit, and acquire a smart card
(Shaheen, Zhang, Martin, & Guzman, 2011). These riders then had
to tap their cards on the docking pole to check-in or check-out bi-
cycles from the docking stations. In Hangzhou, China, people pay a
RMB2001 deposit to register with the program and receive a smart
card. The first hour ride is free, the second hour is charged RMB1,
the third hour is charged RMB2 and RMB3 for all other additional
hours (Shaheen et al. 2011). This system enables program operators
to track bicycles, access user information and discourages bicycle
stealing (Shaheen et al., 2012). Because of the third generation bi-
cycle sharing system's ability to track, bill, and hold the users
accountable, bicycle sharing programs have become popular and
spread all over the world (Fishman et al., 2013).
The first 3rd generation bicycle sharing program in Europe was
implemented in 1998 in Rennes, France (Midgley, 2011). As of May
2013, 204 cities in 36 countries have implemented a bicycle sharing
program and 368,600 bicycles are in operation across 13,600 sta-
tions (Shaheen et al., 2012). Except for Africa, the programs are in
operation on every continent. In China 104 cities and towns across
China have adopted bicycle sharing systems in 2013 (Institute for
Transportation and Development Policy, 2013).
According to Zhang et al. (2014), three business models for the
1
1 US dollar is equal to 6.1 RMB on July 23, 2015 exchange rate.
189
PBSP are at work in China. The first model is where local govern-
ment provides land for bicycle stations (BS) and a state owned
company manages the program. The company earns revenue
through advertisements. Hangzhou's PBSP has adopted this model.
The second model is where a private enterprise manages and
provides bicycle sharing services, while the local government
provides land for stations. The private enterprise collects revenue
from advertisements and bill boards at the stations (Wuhan
model). Finally, the third model is where a private enterprise
manages and provides services, the local government provides
funding, and both the agencies share the revenue generated
through advertisements (Shanghai model).
3. Previous research on PBSP
A number of studies have been carried out on PBSP in North
America and Asia but with different focuses. One group of studies
has targeted the bicycle users' socioeconomic characteristics such
as income, education and car ownership (LDA Consulting, 2012).
Some have focused on how the bicycle programs have influenced
residents public transit use behavior. Shaheen et al. (2012) and
others have looked into the characteristics of people living nearby
bicycle stations (Fuller et al., 2011; Ogilvie & Goodman, 2012). Some
of key features of these studies are as follows.
LDA Consulting (2012) carried out a customer use and satisfac-
tion survey of 5464 bicycle users of the Capital Bicycle Share Pro-
gram (CBSP) implemented in Washington DC and Arlington County,
Virginia in 2011. According to the survey, females accounted for 45
percent of the members (LDA Consulting, 2012). The survey did not
examine the use pattern of migrant workers or immigrants living
and working in the towns. Twenty-five percent of the members had
income less than $4000 per month and 75% were earning above
$4000, and those earning more than $100,000 per month were 39%.
More than nine in ten survey respondents were employed. Car
owners accounted for 53% of the respondents.
Shaheen et al. (2012) carried out an online survey of 10,661
bicycle users from four bicycle sharing programs in North America
from November 2011 through January 2012. They were: Montreal,
Twin Cities (Minneapolis and Saint Paul), Toronto, and Washington,
D.C. The survey found that 28% of the users had approximately less
than $4000 income per month, 66% had income above $4000 and
39% had income over $100,000. More than 85% of the sample was
college educated. Data from Montreal, Toronto and Minnesota
showed that 40 percent of the total sample said that they use their
car less often after joining the PBSP.
Ogilvie and Goodman (2012) analyzed registration data for
100,000 members of the London bicycle share program and found
that the bicycle users were disproportionately male, lived in
pockets of relative affluence and had higher general cycling
participation rates. They found that poor neighborhoods had a
lower concentration of docking stations. Fuller et al. (2011) studied
the bicycle sharing program in Montreal, Canada (BIXI) and found
that men and women had the same likelihood of using BIXI. Most of
them had tertiary education.
Shaheen et al. (2011) conducted an intercept survey of 660
members and 140 nonmembers of Public Bicycle Sharing Program
in Hangzhou in China in 2010 to see the impact of the program on
people's travel behavior. The authors found that approximately 30%
of members had incorporated bicycle-sharing into their most
common commute. About 80 percent of the respondents shifted
from public transport to bicycle use, 50% from car use and 30% from
taxi use. Members exhibited a higher rate of auto ownership than
nonmembers.
Zhang (2011) carried out a survey of 200 bicycle users in 24
bicycle stations in the PBSP implemented in Wuhan, China. The
190 T.K. Karki, L. Tao / Habitat International 53 (2016) 188e194
purpose of the survey was to understand the overall characteristics
of bicycle users. The survey found that 62% of the users were formal
jobholders. Approximately 47.5% of the users had income equiva-
lent to poor households and 36 percent had income equivalent to
lower middle income households and 17 percent had middle to
high income (Zhang, 2011). The primary PBSP related problems
identified by this study was poor quality of bicycles, insufficient
number of bicycle stations, inappropriate location of bicycle sta-
tions, inadequate capacity of BDSs served by poor information
systems. However, this survey did not ask the users' gender or
migrant status. These studies show that fewer people with low
income, less education, and informal jobs were taking advantage of
the PBSP. The primary users of the PBSP were higher income, formal
jobholders with higher education, and who lived closer to the BDSs.
Most of these studies did not capture the bicycle-users' character-
istics by gender, informal sector job, and migration status (migrant
workers or immigrants). How accessible the programs were to
these weaker members of society was not the primary focus of
these studies.
4. What purpose should the PBSP serve?
The PBSP should serve both an instrumental rationality as well
as a social justice goal. It should not only reduce greenhouse gas
emissions and provide healthy transport mode for short commutes,
but also ensure its accessibility to low income families and the
weaker section of society. Planning is carried out to “improve the
welfare of people and their communities by creating more conve-
nient, equitable, healthful, efficient, and attractive places for pre-
sent and future generations” (American Planning Association,
2015). They are set to meet public expectations such having zero-
carbon-mode of transportation in cities (Kaza, 2008). Planning
could meet public expectations only when people have access to
decision making. Involvement of citizens in policymaking or plan-
ning programs reduces the chances of exclusion of the weaker
section of society from public service opportunities (Church, Frost,
& Sullivan, 2000). Participation of marginalized people in plans and
programs would ensure justice and fair planning process (Kaza,
2006). Strong plans stem from planning processes that involve a
broad array of stakeholders, and strong plans accompanied by
broad stakeholder involvement are needed if plans are to have a
significant effect on the actions of local governments (Burby, 2003).
Based on these principles, accessibility and convenience of the PBSP
in Suzhou is examined.
5. Research method
The study area is downtown Suzhou, located in the Canglang
district of the city which has an area of 30 square kilometers,
326,000 people and a density of 10,866 persons per square kilo-
meter (Made-in-China.com, nd). The district is comprised of old
historical sites, busy commercial retail centers, residential areas,
and some offices. This research consisted of an intercept survey of
200 bicycle users, 25 at each of the eight BDSs located in downtown
Suzhou with the help of a structured questionnaire (written both in
English and Chinese). The eight BDSs were selected from the
following land uses: two from residential, commercial, metro-
station and office-areas. The arrangement was used to capture a
mixed group of bicycle users from diverse backgrounds (Fig. 1).
Bicycle users age 18 and above (a requirement to be a member)
who were found in the docking stations and who agreed to respond
to the survey were the subjects of this study. The survey was carried
out during March and April 2012, by a Chinese and English speaking
surveyor. In addition, brief interviews were carried out with five
female bicycle users and migrant-worker bicycle users to
Fig. 1. Study area: Downtown Suzhou, Canglang district, China.
Source: Google map.
understand their perception of the barriers to access to the PBSP in
Suzhou. Furthermore, field visits to the bicycle stations were made
to see their operational performance.
6. A brief introduction to Suzhou's PBSP
Suzhou is one of the most affluent cities in Jiangsu province,
located 45 miles (70 km) west of Shanghai. Its population in 2014
was 4.54 million, with an area of 453 square miles and a density of
10,400 people per square mile (Demographia, 2014). The number of
cars is growing at 20 percent per annum (Suzhou Daily, 2013) and
the greenhouse gas emissions have increased from 126.07 to 169.44
metric tons between 2005 and 2010 (Wang et al. 2014). The city
implemented a third generation bicycle sharing program similar to
the Shanghai-model in August 2010, with 7470 bicycles operating
in 304 stations. By 2013, the number had grown to 12,840 bicycles
and 548 stations in six districts (Institute for Transportation and
Development Policy, 2013). The service is open 24 h a day. The
program was initiated by the Suzhou city government and operated
by a private company (Suzhou Zi You Yun Dong Ke Ji Co.). The
purpose of the bicycle sharing program, as stated by the city, was to
provide a free and convenient public bicycle system to residents
and tourists and to help them connect to the transit stations. Bicycle
docking stations were built in various types of locations including
residential, commercial, and transit stations to enhance access to
diverse areas. Bicycle users are required to register their name with
the bicycle sharing program and get a smart-card, by paying a
RMB200 deposit and RMB100 for charging the smart card. The first
hour of the bicycle use is free and after that users are required to
pay RMB1 for every additional hour.
7. Results and discussion
The research found that the PBSP in Suzhou is dominantly used
by males with higher income, formal jobs, and a college education.
However, the program is less accessible to weaker sections of so-
ciety (Table 1). There is low participation of women, migrant
workers, low income families, informal jobholders and less
educated people.
Women accounted only 28 percent of the 200 bicycle users
surveyed. According to five female PBSP users, there is low female
participation in the PBSP because women are more worried about
the unsafe driving conditions and they think that there should be
more traffic rules and speed limits should be enforced for bicycle
users' safety. Suzhou's PBSP does not require bicycle users to wear
helmet.
 T.K. Karki, L. Tao / Habitat International 53 (2016) 188e194 191

Table 1
PBSP users' characteristics in Suzhou.

PBSP users' characteristics Bicycle user types Suzhou downtown (200)

Gender Female 28%

Male 72%
Without SH (SH: migrant workers) Yes 32%
Income Very low income (Refer footnote 2) 11%
Low income 14%
Upper income 75%
Occupation Informal employment 10%
Formal employment 79%
Students 11%

Yang, Li, Wang, Zhao, and Chen (2013)'s study found that
women in Suzhou are more likely to travel by bicycle than men.
Employed women tend to travel more by public transit. For the
employed women, bicycling is best for making short commutes to
public transit. Females are an important component of the Chinese
labor force and access to convenient and cheaper mode of transport
for their short commute could play an important role in city's
economy and mobility. Two-hundred million females are
economically active in cities and towns of China (Kitching, Mishra,
& Shu, 2005). Females account 30e40% of the migrant population
in China (Nolan, 2008). Even though female's participation in PBSP
is low at present, it is likely to increase as they become more
familiar with the PBSP system (which is relatively new to the city)
and as bicycle safety concerns are addressed. Thirty-two percent of
the bicycle users did not have a Suzhou Hukou (SH). SH is a local
resident permit that is required if one wants to buy an apartment,
send children to public school and receive other local benefits.
Those who do not have SH are largely migrant workers who are
working and living in Suzhou and deprived from access to the
services mentioned above. Migrant worker bicycle users earning
RMB15002 or less per month accounted for only 5 percent of the
bicycle users (Table 2). This suggests that very few of the large mass
of migrant workers working in Suzhou are taking advantage of the
PBSP. Suzhou has about six million migrant workers and many of
them work in the construction industry (Lee, 2014).
Migrant workers accounted for 80 percent of the workforce in
the construction sector and 50 percent in the service sector in China
(Nielsen & Smyth, 2008). These migrant workers are daily con-
sumers of urban transportation services and are in need of acces-
sible, affordable and convenient mode of transport for their daily
commutes. While interviewing five bicycle riders without SH, they
said that getting registered for the bicycle e-card is complicated and
the cost of registration (RMB300) is high for them. Many of these
migrant workers are less educated making filling out the registra-
tion form difficult, they are less confident to go to the registration
center and too busy in their construction labor. Right now, there are
234 million migrant workers and their families living in Chinese
cities without city-hukous basic public services in education,
employment, health care, pensions, and affordable housing
(Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC) and the
State Council, 2014). Next, very low income people accounted for
only 11 percent of the total bicycle users in Suzhou's PBSP. The
figure for people working in informal sector was 10 percent. Only 3
percent of the bicycle users had high school and primary education
and the rest 97% were college educated. Lower participation in PBSP
by people with informal jobs, low income and low education very
much resemble the characteristics of most migrant workers.
Most complaints of the bicycle users regarding the PBSP service
were related to the management of bicycles and bicycle-stations.
Forty-six-percent of the users mentioned that bicycle stations
were not located in convenient locations (Fig. 2). Fourteen percent
responded that slots for bicycle parking were not available at the
docking stations, and 11 percent said that bicycles were not avail-
able, when needed, at the stations. Sixty-four percent of the users
suggested building more bicycle stations, 47 percent wanted to
improve bicycle quality and 24 percent wanted a roof over the bi-
cycle station.
The other issue worth noting is many bicycle stations have been
built on sidewalks made for pedestrian movement, causing an
inconvenience to the people walking (Fig. 3). Since there was no
other space for bicycle stations, in desperation, the authorities
allowed the company to encroach on the sidewalk. Bicycle riding
safety was also a concern for some bicycle users. Of the male bicycle
users, 23 percent of them said they feel unsafe while riding a bi-
cycle. Among female bicycler users, 42 percent of them said that
they feel unsafe riding a PBSP bicycle.
Most of the PBSP's weaknesses as explained above have to do
with culture of planning practice and enforcement of traffic regu-
lations in China. Planning in China follows a top-down approach.
New planning ideas come from higher authorities and the local
officials or mayors (who are not elected but appointed) follow the
order (Leaf & Hou, 2006). The future of the officials' career depends
upon their evaluations by the higher authorities. To qualify for
promotion, the officials have to show progress within four to five
years of their tenure. As a result, they focus on short term targets
set by higher authorities and pay less attention to long term city
goals, and people's concerns. Listening to low income families and
the weaker section of society and making planning services
accessible to those families is not the number one planning priority.
Serving those who are able to pay is the overriding planning norm,
unfortunately, in socialist China.
China's road traffic regulatory environment and safety guide-
lines are not as comprehensive as they should be for ensuring
public safety (Zhang, Tsimhoni, Sivak, & Flannagan, 2010). Traffic
rule compliance in China is not catching up with the rapid growth
and expansion of modern cities and road networks. Most pedes-
trians do not follow traffic regulations, and randomly cross roads
(Yang, Deng, Wang, Li, & Wang, 2006). Willful violation of traffic
Table 2
Bicycle users income and SH status.

Monthly income With local SH Without SH Total

2
Poor RMB2083 per month; Lower middle class ¼ (RMB2083 to RMB3333 per
>4500 RMB 93 (46%) 23 (12%) 116 (57%)
month); Upper middle class (RMB3333 per month RMB8333); Mass affluent
3000e4500 RMB 16 (8%) 20 (10%) 36 (18%)
(RMB8333-RMB16666 per month) Global affluent (above RMB16666 per month)
1500e3000 RMB 17 (9%) 10 (5%) 27 (14%)
(Farrell, Gersch, & Stephenson, 2006). 1 US dollar is equal to 6.1 RMB on July 23,
Under 1500 RMB 11 (6%) 10 (5%) 21 (11%)
2015 exchange rate.
192 T.K. Karki, L. Tao / Habitat International 53 (2016) 188e194
Fig. 2. Public inconvenience on PBSP.
Fig. 3. BDS on pedestrian sidewalks.
regulations is common (Zhou, Horrey, & Yu, 2009; Zhuang & Wu,
2011). Pedestrian road accident deaths account for 40% of all fa-
talities in China (Zhang et al., 2010). Unsafe road environment and
weak enforcement of traffic regulations are some of the key de-
terrents of the PBSP promotion in China.
Suzhou's PBSP is a byproduct of China's planning and regulatory
culture as mentioned above. Suzhou city officials initiated PBSP as
instructed by higher authorities. They started PBSP in haste:
without deeper thought on how to integrate PBSP with the city plan
and how to distribute BDSs efficiently in the city. The local people
were not consulted while finalizing the program. The officials
unilaterally decided to develop bicycle stations on the pedestrian-
sidewalks. Their priority was to meet the deadline set by the
higher authorities rather than to make PBSP accessible and
convenient to the public. Bureaucratic interests dominated plan-
ning decisions, served affluent and able citizens, and overlooked
the needs of the weaker section.
8. Policy implications
This research has generated a number of policy implications for
enhancing access to the PBSP to the weaker section of society in
China. For increasing females' participation in PBSP, further studies
may be necessary to learn what can enhance their participation in
PBSP. Traffic rules should be strictly enforced to create a safe
environment for bicycle use and to gain public confidence.
Department of Traffic Police should: 1) Enforce speed limits in
pedestrian and bicycle movement areas 2) provide signs and
symbols to indicate bicycle lane areas 3) Educate pedestrians,
drivers and bicycle users on traffic and bicycle safety rules, and 4)
Make use of the TV and internet media for this purpose. Incorporate
bicycle safety rules in traffic regulations. Wiersma (2010) found
that the sense of road safety plays a huge role in encouraging bike
use. Rietveld and Daniel (2004) found that Dutch municipalities
that ensured higher safety standards for bicycle users had a higher
share of bicycling for short trips. Noland (1995) also found that
bicycle safety improvements attract proportionately more people
to bicycles.
Next, the Suzhou PBSP should simplify registration rules to
make the registration process easier for migrant workers, poor,
informal jobholders, and less educated people. Initiate online PBSP
registration system to enhance access to PBSP to the busy working
class population. Reduce the registration fee to a lowest level to
encourage weaker section of society to take advantage of the PBSP.
Launch a house to house campaign to assist migrant workers and
poor residents to fill in the PBSP registration form, and educate
them about the advantages of PBSP. Local NGOs and party-workers
and street committees could play an important role in this
regard with the same salary that they get from their respective
organizations.
Suzhou should remove bicycle stations from sidewalks and
relocate them in appropriate locations that do not encroach on
valuable public space and pedestrian routes. The city should think
of retrofitting the bicycle system into the existing city framework.
In other words, prepare a citywide bicycle master plan and make it
an integral part of city plan. For example, Chicago has developed
over 160 km of bicycle lanes during the period of 1997 and 2007,
and it has a plan to reach up to 800 km (City of Chicago, 2007). New
York has over 900 km of bicycle lanes in its jurisdictions (New York
City Department of City Planning, 2009).
Suzhou should reexamine the existing distribution of BDS lo-
cations based on the distance between bicycle stations, population
density, employment density, transit station locations, bicycle
routes, and service areas: educational institutions, museums,
parks, libraries, and other public facilities, as recommended by
METROLINX (2009). BDS distances should be within the optimum
range of 300e500 m (METROLINX, 2009). The Paris bicycle sharing
program has about 14 BDS per square kilometer (METROLINX,
2009). At present, people's response suggests that they are not,
and future studies should examine this question. If the density is
low consider increasing it. Make sure that the less affluent areas
have enough density of BDS. Ogilvie and Goodman (2012) found
that the poor neighborhoods and deprived areas had a lower con-
centration of docking stations in the London Bicycle program.
Suzhou could benefit from international experiences for
ensuring a balanced distribution of bicycles in its BDSs. For example
in BIXI, Montreal, bicycle redistribution trucks have on-board
computers that can provide drivers with information on which
docking stations need more bicycles and which are underused so
that the drivers can respond to bicycle shortages immediately
(Shaheen et al., 2010). In Washington DC, the subscribers of Smart-
Bicycle can go online and access real time information about the
number of bicycles and return-slots available at each location and
recommended routes (METROLINX, 2009). Suzhou could also
consider operating PBSP without permanent BDS like in Germany.
 T.K. Karki, L. Tao / Habitat International 53 (2016) 188e194
In a “Call-a-Bicycle” system in Germany, the users could leave their
bicycle at major locations and inform the program where the bi-
cycle is locked and located (Shaheen et al., 2010). The potential
bicycle users could rent these bicycles by accessing codes, through
mobile phone, for any available bicycle left within an urban area
(METROLINX, 2009).
Consider promoting helmet use for bicycle users' safety in
Suzhou. Helmet use is mandatory in Australia for bicycle users, but
because of lack of ease of access to helmets, people were not taking
advantage of it. In Capital Bicycle Share in Washington DC, where
helmet wearing is not mandatory, 43 percent of the respondents
never used a helmet (LDA Consulting, 2012). The reasons they said
it is inconvenient to carry helmet in unplanned and spontaneous
trips, and others said that Capital bicycle does not provide helmets.
Fischer et al. (2012) studied the relationship between bicycle share
and helmet use in Washington, DC and Boston and found that 80
percent of the bicycle share users were not using helmets. The lack
of access to helmet was their key reason for not wearing a helmet.
Suzhou could address some of these issues before making helmet a
requirement in the city. One option Suzhou could consider is to
make an arrangement where helmets could be locked and released
from the docking-station with the same e-card and the users could
get access to those helmets in the BDS. Since they could lock back
their helmet at BDS, they do not have to carry their helmet with
them while moving around in the area. In addition to helmet use,
driving behaviors of car drivers and motorcycle riders play a very
important role for bicycle safety. In this regard, an education pro-
gram for drivers should be launched and the provision of dedicated
bicycle lanes considered. To sum up, a safe road environment, bi-
cycle safety regulations, and strict enforcement of these regula-
tions, are the key preconditions for a successful implementation of
the recommendations presented above.
9. Conclusion
Bicycle sharing as a low carbon transport policy is becoming
popular in Chinese cities among affluent males, college educated,
formal jobholders and working-age populations, mainly as a result
of strong public policy commitments by the government. However,
the program is less accessible to the weaker section of society.
There is low participation of women, migrant workers, low income
families, informal jobholders and less educated people in the PBSP
in Suzhou. Suzhou municipality and other local governments in
China should go a step further to ensure access to those services to
these underserved populations. They should explore ways to
enhance womens' participation in the PBSP.
While doing so the policymakers should apply bottom-up
model of planning, engage people including weaker section of so-
ciety in decision making. Do not view PBSP in isolation and
implement it on an ad hoc basis. Make it a part of city master plan
that ensures accessibility, safety and convenience to the public.
Acknowledgment
I like to thank Jessica Gordon, doctoral candidate in Environ-
ment Policy and Planning Progam at MIT, for her time to read this
paper and provide English grammar feedbacks.
References
American Planning Association. (2015). What is planning?. https://www.planning.
org/aboutplanning/whatisplanning.htm.
Burby, R. J. (2003). Making plans that Matter: citizen involvement and government
action. Journal of the American Planning Association, 69(1), 33e49. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1080/01944360308976292.
Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC) and the State Council.
193
(2014). New national urbanization plan (2014-2020).
Church, A., Frost, M., & Sullivan, K. (2000). Transport and social exclusion in London.
Transport Policy, 7, 195e205.
City of Chicago. (2007). Bike 2015 plan for the city of Chicago. Retrieved November
30, 2007, from http://www.bike2015plan.org/.
DeMaio, P. (2009). Bike-sharing: history, impacts, models of provision, and future.
Journal of Public Transportation, 12.
Demographia. (2014). Demographia world urban areas (built-up areas or world
agglomeration) 10th Annual Edition.
Farrell, D., Gersch, U. A., & Stephenson, E. (2006). The value of China's emerging
middle class. The Mackinsey Quarterly.
Fischer, C. M., Sanchez, C. E., Pittman, M., Milzman, D., Volz, K. A., Huang, H., et al.
(2012). Prevalence of bicycle helmet use by users of public bikeshare programs.
Annals of Emergency Medicine, 60(2), 228e231.
Fishman, E., Washington, S., & Haworth, N. (2013). Bike share: a synthesis of the
literature. Transport Reviews, 33(2), 148e165. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
01441647.2013.775612.
Fuller, D., Gauvin, L., Kestens, Y., Daniel, M., Fournier, M., Morency, P., et al. (2011).
Use of a new public bicycle share program in Montreal, Canada. American
Journal of Preventive Medicine, 41(1), 80e83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.amepre.2011.03.002.
Institute for Transportation and Development Policy. (2013). Quantitative parame-
ters. from www.publicbike.net.
Kaza, N. (2006). Tyranny of the median and costly consent: a reflection on the
justification for participatory urban planning processes. Planning Theory, 5(3),
255e270. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1473095206068630.
Kaza, N. (2008). Reasoning with plans inference of semantic relationships among plans
about urban development. Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois at Urbana-
Champaign (Doctor of Philosophy in Regional Planning).
Kitching, B. M., Mishra, R., & Shu, X. (2005). Female enterpreneurs in transitional
economics: A comparative study of women in the business workplace in India and
China.
LDA Consulting. (2012). Capital Bikeshare 2011 member survey report.
Leaf, M., & Hou, L. (2006). The “Third Spring” of urban planning in China: the
resurrection of professional planning in the Post-Mao Era. China Information,
20(3), 553e585. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0920203x06070043.
Lee, B. (2014). Who will listen to the voices of migrant workers?. Retrieved April 9,
2014, from http://www.oxfam.org.hk/en/migrantworker.aspx.
Li, W. (2009). Walking and cycling system planning and practice. Beijing: Knowledge
Publishing House.
Made-in-China.com. (n.d.). Suzhou. Retrieved November, 5, 2015, from http://
suzhou.made-in-china.com/info/canglang-district.html.
METROLINX. (2009). Phase I final report bike share program investigation e best
practices investigation. Ontario: An Agency of the Government of Ontario.
Midgley, P. (2011). Bicycle-sharing schemes: Enhancing sustainable mobility in urban
areas. New York: United Nations Department of Economics and Social Affairs.
New York City Department of City Planning. (2009). Bike-share opportunities in New
York city. New York: New York City.
Nielsen, I. L., & Smyth, R. (2008). The rhetoric and the reality of social protection for
China's migrant workers. In I. L. Nielsen, & R. Smyth (Eds.), Migration and social
protection in China (Vol. 14). World Scientific Publishing and Imperial College
Press.
Nolan, J. (2008). Gender and Equality of opportunity in China's labour market:
Department of sociology. University of Cambridge.
Noland, R. B. (1995). Perceived risk and modal choice: risk compensation in
transportation systems. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 27(4), 503e521.
Ogilvie, F., & Goodman, A. (2012). Inequalities in usage of a public bicycle sharing
scheme: socio-demographic predictors of uptake and usage of the London (UK)
cycle hire scheme. Preventive Medicine, 55(1), 40e45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.ypmed.2012.05.002.
Rietveld, P., & Daniel, V. (2004). Determinants of bicycle use: do municipal policies
matter? Transportation Research Part A, 38, 531e550.
Shaheen, S. A., Guzman, S., & Zhang, H. (2010). Bikesharing in Europe, the Americas,
and Asia. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research
Board, 2143(-1), 159e167. http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2143-20.
Shaheen, S. A., Martin, E. W., Cohen, A. P., & Finson, R. S. (2012). Public bike sharing in
North America: Early operator and user understanding. Mineta Transportation
Institute.
Shaheen, S. A., Zhang, H., Martin, E., & Guzman, S. (2011). China's Hangzhou public
bicycle. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research
Board, 2247(1), 33e41. http://dx.doi.org/10.3141/2247-05.
SuzhouDaily. (2013). Will Suzhou curb motor vehicle ownership?. from http://www.
chinadaily.com.cn/m/jiangsu/zhangjiagang/2013-12/24/content_17193312.htm.
The National Development and Reform Commission of the People’s Republic of
China. (2012). China's policies and actions for addressing climate change.
Wang, Y., Teter, J., & Sperling, D. (2011). China's soaring vehicle population: even
greater than forecasted? Energy Policy, 39(6), 3296e3306. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.enpol.2011.03.020.
Wang, H., Wang, Y., Wang, H., Liu, M., Zhang, Y., Zhang, R. … Bi, J. (2014). Mitigating
greenhouse gas emissions from China's cities: case study of Suzhou. Energy
Policy. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.12.066i.
Wiersma, B. (2010). Bicycle sharing system: Role, effects and application to Plymouth
Groningen. University of Groningen.
Xinhua. (2013). Car emissions contribute to dense smog in Beijing: Research. http://
news.xinhuanet.com/english/china/2013-02/03/c_132148316.htm.
194 T.K. Karki, L. Tao / Habitat International 53 (2016) 188e194
Yang, J., Deng, W., Wang, J., Li, Q., & Wang, Z. (2006). Modeling pedestrians' road
crossing behavior in traffic system micro-simulation in China. Transportation
Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 40(3), 280e290. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.tra.2005.08.001.
Yang, M., Li, D., Wang, W., Zhao, J., & Chen, X. (2013). Modeling gender-based dif-
ferences in mode choice considering time-use pattern: analysis of bicycle,
public transit, and car use in Suzhou, China. Advances in Mechanical Engineering,
2013, 1e11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/706918.
Zhang, Y. (2011). Evaluating performance of bicycle sharing system in Wuhan, China
(Master of Science in Geo-information Science and Earth Observation). Uni-
versity of Twente.
Zhang, H., Shaheen, S. A., & Chen, X. (2014). Bicycle evolution in China: from the
1900s to the present. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 8(5),
317e335. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15568318.2012.699999.
Zhang, W., Tsimhoni, O., Sivak, M., & Flannagan, M. J. (2010). Road safety in China:
analysis of current challenges. Journal of Safety Research, 41(1), 25e30. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2009.12.003.
Zhou, R., Horrey, W. J., & Yu, R. (2009). The effect of conformity tendency on pe-
destrians' road-crossing intentions in China: an application of the theory of
planned behavior. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 41(3), 491e497. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2009.01.007.
Zhuang, X., & Wu, C. (2011). Pedestrians' crossing behaviors and safety at unmarked
roadway in China. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 43(6), 1927e1936. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2011.05.005.