超越二元对立：网约车如何与公共交通既竞争又互补
Beyond the Dichotomy: How Ride-hailing Competes with and Complements Public Transport
AI总结：
该研究利用美欧6城Uber数据，分析网约车与公共交通的竞争互补关系，打破二元对立认知，明确了无公交替代的行程占比、可达性差异及需求占比与出行时间竞争力的关联。
摘要：
由于网约车已成为全球众多城市的重要出行选择，围绕其与公共交通服务是竞争还是互补关系的讨论十分激烈。我们利用美国和欧洲6座城市的Uber出行数据，为每趟网约车行程匹配最具吸引力的公共交通替代方案，进而探讨以下问题：（一）网约车的出行时间与成本相较最快的公共交通替代方案表现如何？（二）没有可行公共交通替代方案的网约车行程占比多少？（三）网约车如何改变整体服务可达性？（四）两种出行方式的需求占比与相对竞争关系之间存在何种关联？\n 研究结果表明，“竞争或互补”的二元对立并不成立。尽管绝大多数网约车行程都有可行的公共交通替代方案，但仍有20%至40%的行程不存在此类替代方案。纳入网约车后带来的服务可达性提升，在美国城市中比欧洲城市更为显著。需求分配与出行时间的相对竞争力直接相关：即当公共交通出行时间具有竞争力时，网约车的需求占比更低，反之亦然。
英文摘要：
Since ride-hailing has become an important travel alternative in many cities worldwide, a fervent debate is underway on whether it competes with or complements public transport services. We use Uber trip data in six cities in the United States and Europe to identify the most attractive public transport alternative for each ride. We then address the following questions: (i) How does ride-hailing travel time and cost compare to the fastest public transport alternative? (ii) What proportion of ride-hailing trips that do not have a viable public transport alternative? (iii) How does ride-hailing change overall service accessibility? (iv) What is the relation between demand share and relative competition between the two alternatives? Our findings suggest that the dichotomy - competing with or complementing - is false. Though the vast majority of ride-hailing trips have a viable public transport alternative, between 20% and 40% of them have no viable public transport alternative. The increased service accessibility attributed to the inclusion of ride-hailing is greater in our US cities than in their European counterparts. Demand split is directly related to the relative competitiveness of travel times i.e. when public transport travel times are competitive ride-hailing demand share is low and vice-versa.
机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来，可能存在错误，请以论文正文为准。
