# Mode Choice Effects on Bike Sharing Systems
## 2 Literature Review  
BSS were introduced in many cities around the globe in the last decade. In parallel, the number of studies on BSS has increased as well (for comparative meta-studies see e.g., Refs. [1; 2; 3; 4; 5]). Most of these studies indicate that BSS-use substitutes sustainable modes such as walking and PT; however, some report that BSS-use also reduces trips by car and other PMT means. The effect on PMT is closely related to the synergetic effects of multi- and intermodal combinations of BSS with PT and promoting cycling in general [5]. In order to incorporate BSS into transport demand models and thus estimate more comprehensively the potential of reducing car trips, it is necessary to understand the mode and route choice behaviour of (potential) BSS users; so far, only a few studies focused on mode and route choice behaviour of BSS-users see Refs. [6; 7; 8; 9], while much more studies exist for cycling with private bikes. Filling this gap is the aim of the survey, which is presented in the following sections. Several research studies investigated the influence of different attributes on cycling. [PERSON] and [PERSON] [10] reviewed the effects of cycling infrastructure; among other things, they found that cyclists tend to prefer separated bike lanes, lower speed limits and volumes of motorized traffic, trees along the route, and routes with fewer intersections; further, they tend to avoid routes with on-street parking and many variations in altitude. Other studies investigated the effects of the built environment to enhance walking and cycling levels [11; 12]. Their main findings highlight the importance of short distances to destinations, mixed land use with high densities of population and facilities for groceries, retail, service, and recreation), charges for car parking, and a network of convenient cycling infrastructure for increased shares of bike-use. What cyclists perceive as convenient highly depends on the study location, but amongst other factors, they prefer segregation or protection from motor traffic, little or only small detours, avoidance of intersections with motor traffic, and bike parking facilities. Studies have also investigated how the built environment affects the use of bike-sharing stations [13; 14]. It was found that high densities and proximity to cycling-friendly routes and to PT stations play a crucial role; furthermore, a study from Lisbon described an algorithm-based approach for the identification of optimal locations for stations and fleet dimensions for BSS by taking into account user demand, renting-costs, and a mixed fleet of regular and electric bikes [15]. In addition, there are studies, which explicitly investigated the mode choice behaviour of cyclists on both private and shared bikes: [PERSON] and [PERSON] [16] studied the mode choice behaviour of around 4.600 commuters in Washington; their result is those bike parking facilities, non-free car parking, and showers at work increase the utility of commuting by bike. In another study, cycling was compared with bus riding and driving with respect to travel time reliability [17]; it was found that for habitually repeated trips, travellers rate reliability higher than travel time. [PERSON] et al. [6] investigated the factors influencing the choices for bike-sharing (conventional bike and e-bike) in Beijing [6]; they found that trip distance, rain, temperature, and poor air quality negatively impact the choice for non-electric BSS on the one side. On the other side, they reported that users'socio-demographic characteristics only play a minor role.