Minister Khaw Boon Wan recently outlined his vision for a city with fewer automobiles, predicting that cars may go out of fashion. The rationale lies in the potential environmental and social benefits derived from reduced car use. The big question would then be on how we should trim the vehicle population and encourage less driving without greatly compromising mobility. Car-sharing is hailed as a solution, with successful examples in the UK, France and Germany. Experts suggest Singapore has the right geographical attributes for car-sharing, so the focus then turns to breaking down barriers such as attitudes and culture.
Why less can be more
According to figures from the Land Transport Authority (LTA), there were 582,296 private cars registered in Singapore in 2013[1]. Cars contribute to the demand for road and parking space. Through the collaborative consumption model of car-sharing — with one car shared among multiple car club members — a more efficient resource use could be achieved. Fewer cars could mean more space for pedestrians and cyclists, enhancing the public realm by expanding sidewalks and green space, as seen with the monthly closure of a section of Orchard Road. Carbon emissions would also be reduced, with a smoother traffic flow contributing to shorter bus journey times. For the individual, it promises a simplified, ‘under-one-roof’ payment model, and eliminates ownership responsibilities. Instead of paying loan instalments, insurance premiums, fuel and servicing costs, road tax, and residential parking fees separately, one only receives the invoice for vehicle booking and membership fees. Perhaps the most helpful feature in promoting such sustainable travel is the transparency of costs. Many car owners fail to take into account the full costs of automobile travel such as vehicle depreciation and maintenance costs, on top of fuel and parking charges. Thus, rational travel choices may not be made, with car owners spending more on driving than what they budgeted for. Also, the decision to drive may have become a conditioned one, discounting the possibility of using public transport or walking where the latter may in fact be more practical for some trips.
Academics Reus Meijkamp and Henk Aarts from the Netherlands reported in a 1997 paper that a 65% reduction in private vehicle mileage was achieved for users who switched to car-sharing. This has a significant impact in alleviating congestion and reducing emissions. In 2005, Millard-Ball and colleagues concluded that a single shared vehicle substituted at least five privately owned vehicles and averted planned car purchases in the US. These findings are congruent with the strategy of making Singapore one of the more sustainable cities in the world.
What stands in the way?
Nevertheless, car-sharing remains unpopular for now, even if efforts have been made to broaden its appeal. Certainly, what works in other countries may not necessarily translate into local success. Singapore has several unique factors differentiating her from her European and US counterparts. While it is debatable whether Singaporeans still strive towards attaining the 5Cs (one of which is ‘car’) as much as a decade or so ago, there is no denying the exclusive status of car ownership, as well as the expressive and social functions it can fulfil. Attitudes also play an important role, given our reluctance to share private assets with others (as necessitated with peer-to-peer car-sharing). It takes time to inculcate responsibility and etiquette in order for car-sharing to be embraced wholeheartedly, not to mention a shift in cultural values. Perhaps the key reason behind the use of personal transport lies in the instrumental aspect of travel, which includes practical considerations such as a shorter journey time or the ability to transport large items.
When looking at car-sharing as an alternative to ownership, it is important to bear in mind that it is not meant as a like-for-like substitute for ownership. To enjoy the benefits of cost-savings and reduced responsibilities, users will have to incorporate the use of public transport or taxis in a wider, multi-modal transit lifestyle. Hence, there must be strong options in these areas to attract would-be car-sharers.
What can be done?
Possible solutions can be devised in two areas. In a study I worked on, concerns raised by car owners who compared car-sharing with ownership included trip-planning and the obligation to return the vehicle by a fixed time, all of which can be mitigated through trials which help users familiarise themselves with the service. Encouragement can be drawn from a 2003 report by Richard Katzev, which describes a car-sharing club in Portland where initial concerns did not translate into significant problems.
At the operational level, increasing the number of locations and car-sharing vehicles will reduce access distance and boost availability. Once we have a large, active network in place, we could also consider implementing a free-floating system like Daimler’s Car2Go, which allows one-way journeys to be made. Governmental support and commitment is crucial if car-sharing is to become more mainstream. Since car-sharing is complementary to public transport, car-sharing clubs could try to forge partnerships with public transport operators to offer users a discounted bus and train pass, like in Germany. Having more car-sharing locations near major transport interchanges would also help.
Without doubt, multiple factors contribute to the complexity of selecting a mode of travel, and it would be an oversimplification to suggest that good service is sufficient to attract new users on board. A sense of collectivism and environmental awareness must be cultivated for us to appreciate the importance of sustainable mobility.
Looking ahead
It is essential that we create a conducive environment to reduce our reliance on private cars. Aided by visionary urban planning, cities like Freiburg and Vauban in Germany have lower car ownership rates than the national average, and residents enjoy a high quality of life. We can facilitate this through car-sharing by making it a compelling alternative to ownership and developing a sharing culture. With Certificate of Entitlement (COE) prices as they are now, there is an opportunity to get more car-sharing members on board. Moreover, car-sharing can facilitate the move from internal combustion vehicles to zero-emission electric vehicles, given the conservativeness of private buyers towards the latter. It might take time to shift away from the existing regime of automobility; cars may not go out of fashion just yet, but we can certainly promote car-sharing as a positive lifestyle choice, which enhances the status of users by showing that they are adopters of an innovative mode of transportation and are environmentally conscious — just like how cycling is perceived in Copenhagen. We can certainly plan for the capacity to change the way we travel.
Leonard Chew has recently completed his Masters in Transport and City Planning at the University College London with a dissertation about car-sharing.
Photo credit: Author’s own
———-
[1]. This figure was obtained by adding the number of private cars and off-peak cars owned by individuals. Company, tuition and rental cars are excluded because the article focuses on private car ownership. Source: http://www.lta.gov.sg/content/dam/ltaweb/corp/PublicationsResearch/files/FactsandFigures/MVP01-1_MVP_by_type.pdf