Evaluates the impact of e-bikes and bikesharing on job accessibility in São Paulo, indicating significant benefits for lower-income groups.
Despite their potential to address limitations of conventional cycling, the role of e-bikes and bikesharing systems in improving job accessibility and transport equity, particularly when integrated with public transport, remains underexplored. This study addresses this gap by evaluating the impacts of e-bikes and bikesharing on job accessibility and spatial equity in São Paulo, Brazil, through a systematic comparison of access-only, egress-only, and full integration scenarios combining cycling with public transport. Cycling travel times are modeled using GPS data from a large-scale bikesharing system. Results show that, when used to access public transport, e-bikes substantially increase job accessibility relative to access by walking, and also relative to conventional bicycles across all travel-time thresholds, although their relative advantage diminishes as travel times increase. Access-only and egress-only configurations produce comparable gains independently, while full integration scenarios yield the largest improvements. The inclusion of bikesharing at egress further amplifies accessibility gains, particularly at longer thresholds, while substantial accessibility deficits persist in peripheral areas. Equity analyses using the Concentration Index and bivariate Local Moran's I indicate that cycling-based integration with public transport reduces but does not eliminate income-based and spatial inequalities, with bikesharing at egress generating larger equity improvements than cycling at access alone. Job accessibility gains from e-bikes and bikesharing are relatively larger for lower- and middle-income groups at longer travel times, even as absolute accessibility advantages remain concentrated in higher-income, central areas. These results highlight both the potential and the limits of e-bikes and bikesharing as strategies for improving job accessibility and transport equity in large, highly centralized metropolitan regions, particularly given the uneven spatial distribution of Tembici stations and cycling infrastructure.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Louro et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: