Skip to main content

Table 3 The economic viability of different mobility solutions when compared to private car or tourist rental car

From: In search of sustainable and inclusive mobility solutions for rural areas

  Advantages Disadvantages
Conventional public transport + low user costs compared to private car when travelling alone − no cost reduction per person when travelling with several people (scale effect from car use)
− if cost is perceived as high, barrier to use
− major funding needed from local/national authorities
Designated tourist buses + minor funding needed from local/national authorities − typically, needs a higher contribution from the user
− coach travellers don’t spend much time and money on local products and services
Semi-flexible DRT + the larger the implementation scale, the lower the cost − if user costs are perceived high, a car is preferred
− higher cost of the system compared to traditional public transport due to flexibility
− major funding needed from local/national authorities
− costs should be divided between different stakeholders
Flexible door-to-door DRT + the larger the implementation scale, the lower the cost − typically, needs a higher contribution from the user
− higher costs of the system compared to traditional public transport due to flexibility
− major funding needed from local/national authorities
Car-sharing and ride-sharing + minor funding needed from local/national authorities − high expectations for the service, but low willingness-to-pay
− difficult to ensure a sustainable business model
− very dependent on matchmaking quality and ensuring a sufficient number of cars
  1. Composed based on Baker [68], Mullay and Nelson [78], de Jong et al. [10], Pronello and Camusso [76], Guyader and Piscicelli [77], Cottrill et al. [1], Panzer-Krause [42], Porru et al. [12], SMARTA [52] and Lygnerud and Nilsson [64]