DOI: 10.25338/b87g9w
title: Ridehailing, uncertainty and sustainable transportation

description: This study investigates how stakeholders throughout the state of
 California view the potential impacts of ridehailing services such as Uber
 or Lyft, to transportation systems, and how to address such impacts.
 Ridehailing is one of several emerging shared use mobility alternatives,
 poised to impact transportation systems, for better or worse. For better
 if these new services catalyze the development and maturation of
 well-integrated multi-model transportation systems that serve all
 travelers and reduce vehicle miles travelled (VMT) and transportation
 emissions. For worse if these new services serve merely as a less
 expensive taxi, allowing more people to forego alternative modes of
 transportation like public transit and biking, thereby leading to
 increases in VMT and emissions and worsening congestion impacts. The high
 degree of uncertainty surrounding the impacts of these services presents
 challenges to stakeholders involved in transportation planning and
 policymaking. How transportation stakeholders view the potential positive
 and negative impacts of ridehailing and what to do about them is an open
 question, and one that warrants investigation as these services become
 more popular and their impacts begin to be understood. Through interviews,
 we investigate the viewpoints of 42 transportation stakeholders throughout
 the state of California. We find the diversity of interviewees is
 reflected in the sentiments they have about ridehailing, what issues are
 important and potential obstacles to achieving positive outcomes.
 Nonetheless, interviewees agree that regulations should balance local
 control with state level guidance.
description: This dataset
 consists of a portion of interview data collected in January through March
 of 2018; for each interviewee discussions related to perspectives on
 uncertainty have been identified and included in this dataset.
 This data was collected through semi-structured interviews by
 phone with 42 stakeholders involved in transportataion planning or policy
 from state, regional and local agencies as well as public interest groups
 or non-profits. Each interview was recorded and transcribed, and then the
 content was coded using a confirmatory method. The
 entire interview for each participant was coded, and the codes for each
 interview are entered into datasets in two ways. First, each interviewee
 is represented as a row, with columns included for every possible code and
 binary indicators (0 = not present, 1 = present) are used to denote
 whether or not each participant had a portion of their interview coded in
 that way. In addition, a second form of the dataset was produced, in which
 each row represents a single code from one interview; this format includes
 every code for each interview and each interview appears multiple times -
 one for each code assigned to a part of their interview. In addition to
 the list of codes, snippets of text are included that represent the
 portion of the interview for which the code was assigned.
 Each interviewee is assigned an ID number which also indicates
 the type of participant; city, mpo, etc. The data is stripped of all
 identifiable information.
description: This data is the information from our interviews used in the
 preparation of one paper and one report for this project. Because this
 data was collected from interviews, it appears incomplete in the format
 attached here. The data included here was used in the analysis for a paper
 and related report. As we complete more analysis, additional portions of
 the data will be made available, and eventually the full dataset, along
 with complete or near complete transcriptions of the interviews.