Shared Micro-mobility Adoption: A Qualitative Investigation of User Motives for Electric Scooters and E-Bicycles
Authors
PhD in Marketing Faculty of Economic and Management of Tunis Research Laboratory: Business and Marketing Research (ERMA) (Tunisia)
University Professor Faculty of Economic and Management of Tunis Research Laboratory: Business and Marketing Research (ERMA) (Tunisia)
Article Information
DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS.2025.91100093
Subject Category: Marketing
Volume/Issue: 9/11 | Page No: 1191-1196
Publication Timeline
Submitted: 2025-11-20
Accepted: 2025-11-26
Published: 2025-12-01
Abstract
In response to environmental challenges and increasing urban congestion, micro-mobility emerges as a sustainable solution for short-distance urban travel. It reduces the carbon footprint while offering speed and flexibility. This study investigates user motivations for adopting electric bicycles and electric scooters based on 21 semi-structured interviews. The results reveal four key motivations: utilitarian (practicality and time savings), environmental (reducing ecological impact), hedonic (enjoyment and travel comfort), and social (peer influence and social image). The adoption of micro-mobility extends beyond mere practical function; it reflects a considered choice that combines efficiency, ecological responsibility, and social valuation. These findings identify the determining factors for supporting the expansion of these transport modes and offer strategic guidance for designing urban policies and innovative, sustainable mobility solutions tailored to the actual needs of users.
Keywords
shared micro-mobility, electric bicycles
Downloads
References
1. Cheng, W., Yang, J., Wu, X., Zhang, T., & Yin, Z. (2024). A quantitative study on factors influencing user satisfaction of micro-mobility in China in the post-sharing era. Sustainability, 16(4), 1637. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
2. Cohen, A., & Shaheen, S. (2018). Planning for shared mobility. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
3. Delacroix, E., Jolibert, A., Monnot, É. et Jourdan, P. (2021). Chapitre 6. L’analyse des données qualitatives et documentaires. Gestion Sup , 151-177. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
4. Felländer, A., Ingram, C., & Teigland, R. (2015). Sharing economy. In embracing change with caution. Näringspolitiskt Forum Rapport (Vol. 11). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
5. Kalašová, A., & Čulík, K. (2023). The micromobility tendencies of people and their transport behavior. Applied Sciences, 13(19), 10559. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
6. Kazemzadeh, K., & Ronchi, E. (2022). From bike to electric bike level-of-service. Transport reviews, 42(1), 6-31. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
7. Kazemzadeh, K., & Ronchi, E. (2022). From bike to electric bike level-of-service. Transport reviews, 42(1), 6-31. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
8. Schlagwein, D., Schoder, D., & Spindeldreher, K. (2020). Consolidated, systemic conceptualization, and definition of the “sharing economy”. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 71(7), 817-838. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
9. Thiétart, R. A. (2025). Méthodes de recherche en management-5e éd. Dunod.. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
10. Tzouras, P. G., Pastia, V., Kaparias, I., & Kepaptsoglou, K. (2025). Exploring the effect of perceived safety in first/last mile mode choices. Transportation, 52(5), 2145-2183. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
11. Weschke, J., Oostendorp, R., & Hardinghaus, M. (2022). Mode shift, motivational reasons, and impact on emissions of shared e-scooter usage. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 112, 103468. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
12. Yanocha, D., & Allan, M. (2019). The electric assist: Leveraging e-bikes and e-scooters for more livable cities. Institute for Transportation & Development Policy. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]