Urban Car-Sharing Viability in the Knowledge Economy: A Monte Carlo-Based Planning Tool for Shared Mobility Policy

Authors

Keywords:

car-sharing services; Monte Carlo simulation; critical mass; shared-mobility policy; urban-rural divergence; market entry thresholds; Berlin.

Abstract

This study presents a Monte Carlo simulation to estimate the viability thresholds of car-sharing services in urban areas. Departing from traditional revenue-based assessments, the model uses real cost structures to identify the minimum population size required to reach critical mass. Critical mass, in this context, is defined as the number of users needed for a platform business to reach its breakeven point. The study also explains the increasing urban-rural divergence in adopting platform-based services. The findings highlight substantial urban-rural divides in service viability and offer concrete tools for policymakers to allocate resources and support infrastructure in underserved areas. This cost-based planning tool contributes to sustainable urban mobility policy by quantifying regional thresholds for service provision. To simulate these results, a multivariate model was developed that considers real market data in the car-sharing industry. The model considers several input variables to capture a broad spectrum of market conditions that feed into a final formulation providing two distinct results: an on-site service provider's critical mass and an estimation of the population required in an area for the company to reach its minimum threshold. The study provides a transparent, data-driven tool to support urban mobility planning and resource allocation. By identifying critical population thresholds for the economic viability of car-sharing services, the model enables policymakers and urban planners to make evidence-based decisions on where to facilitate or subsidise shared mobility infrastructures. The simulation was run 10,000 times to reflect a broad range of market conditions. Results from the Berlin case show a minimum viability threshold of approximately 1.12 million residents, with a probability of around 91% at Berlin’s current population of 3.71 million and near-certain viability at around 5.8 million residents. In regions falling below these thresholds, the tool helps to justify targeted interventions—such as financial grants, regulatory incentives or hybrid public-private service models—to mitigate accessibility gaps and reduce urban-rural mobility disparities. As such, the model contributes to a more efficient and equitable allocation of mobility resources and supports the strategic deployment of sustainable transport solutions in underserved areas.

References

Aliu, S., Traxler, A. A., & Greiling, D. (2025). How do European Union electric utilities contribute to the Sustainable Development Goals? Empirical insights on reporting and management control practices. Utilities Policy, 96, Article 101966. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jup.2025.101966

Becker, H., Ciari, F., & Axhausen, K. W. (2017). Modelling free-floating car-sharing use in Switzerland: A spatial regression and conditional logit approach. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 81, 286-299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2017.06.008

de Lorimier, A., & El-Geneidy, A. M. (2013). Understanding the factors affecting vehicle usage and availability in carsharing networks: A case study of Communauto carsharing system from Montréal, Canada. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 7(1), 35-51. https://doi.org/10.1080/15568318.2012.660104

European Central Bank. (2025, December 3). Cost of borrowing for corporations, Euro area, Monthly (MIR.M.U2.B.A2I.AM.R.A.2240.EUR.N) [Data set]. ECB Data Portal. https://data.ecb.europa.eu/data/datasets/MIR/MIR.M.U2.B.A2I.AM.R.A.2240.EUR.N

Evans, D. S., & Schmalensee, R. (2010). Failure to launch: Critical mass in platform businesses (SSRN Scholarly Paper No. 1353502). Social Science Research Network. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1353502

Ferreira, J. J. M., & Fernandes, A. J. C. (2023). Exploring theoretical lineages on collaborative consumption: trends and future research paths. Management Decision. Ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-04-2023-0671

Galina, T., Urkmez, T., & Ralf, W. (2018). Cross-cultural variations in consumer behavior: A literature review of international studies. South East European Journal of Economics and Business, 13(2), 49-71. https://doi.org/10.2478/jeb-2018-0012 Habibi, S., Sprei, F., Englund, C., Pettersson, S., Voronov, A., Wedlin, J., & Engdahl, H. (2017). Comparison of free-floating car-sharing services in cities. In ECEEE Summer Study Proceedings (pp. 771-778). European Council of Energy Efficient Economy. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:hh:diva-35485

Hahn, R., Ostertag, F., Lehr, A., Büttgen, M., & Benoit, S. (2020). "I like it, but I don't use it": Impact of carsharing business models on usage intentions in the sharing economy. Business Strategy and the Environment, 29(3), 1404-1418. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2441

Hillier, F., & Lieberman, J. G. (2009). Introduction to operations research (9th ed). McGraw-Hill Higher Education.

Hollman, A. K., Obermier, T. R., & Burger, P. R. (2021). Rural measures: A quantitative study of the rural digital divide. Journal of Information Policy, 11, 176-201. https://doi.org/10.5325/jinfopoli.11.2021.0176

Hossain, M., & Mozahem, N. A. (2022). Drivers' perceptions of the sharing economy for transport services. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 179, Article 121668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121668

Illgen, S., & Höck, M. (2020). Establishing car sharing services in rural areas: A simulation-based fleet operations analysis. Transportation, 47(2), 811-826. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-018-9920-5

Jia, J., Ma, S., Xue, Y., & Kong, D. (2020). Life-cycle break-even analysis of electric carsharing: A comparative study in China. Sustainability, 12(16), Article 6584. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12166584

Kim, J., Rasouli, S., & Timmermans, H. J. P. (2017). The effects of activity-travel context and individual attitudes on car-sharing decisions under travel time uncertainty: A hybrid choice modelling approach. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 56, 189-202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2017.07.022

Lamberton, C. (2016). Collaborative consumption: A goal-based framework. Current Opinion in Psychology, 10, 55-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.12.004

Lange, F., Peters, A., Kanbach, D. K., & Kraus, S. (2023). Characteristics of platform providers in collaborative consumption: A derivation of archetypes. Management Decision. Ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-04-2023-0653

Lefeng, S., Chunxiu, L., Jingrong, D., & Cipcigan, L. (2020). External benefits calculation of sharing electric vehicles in the case of Chongqing, China. Utilities Policy, 64, Article 101021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jup.2020.101021

Loose, W., Mohr, M., & Nobis, C. (2006). Assessment of the future development of car sharing in Germany and related opportunities. Transport Reviews, 26(3), 365–382.https://doi.org/10.1080/01441640500495096

Meelen, T., Frenken, K., & Hobrink, S. (2019). Weak spots for car-sharing in The Netherlands? The geography of socio-technical regimes and the adoption of niche innovations. Energy Research & Social Science, 52, 132-143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2019.01.023

Münzel, K., Boon, W., Frenken, K., & Vaskelainen, T. (2018). Carsharing business models in Germany: Characteristics, success and future prospects. Information Systems and e-Business Management, 16(2), 271-291. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-017-0355-x

Namazu, M., & Dowlatabadi, H. (2018). Vehicle ownership reduction: A comparison of one-way and two-way carsharing systems. Transport Policy, 64, 38-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2017.11.001

Nansubuga, B., & Kowalkowski, C. (2021). Carsharing: A systematic literature review and research agenda. Journal of Service Management, 32(6), 55-91. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOSM-10-2020-0344

Nijland, H., & van Meerkerk, J. (2017). Mobility and environmental impacts of car sharing in the Netherlands. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 23, 84-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2017.02.001

Perboli, G., Ferrero, F., Musso, S., & Vesco, A. (2018). Business models and tariff simulation in car-sharing services. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 115, 32-48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2017.09.011

Plewnia, F., & Guenther, E. (2018). Mapping the sharing economy for sustainability research. Management Decision, 56(3), 570-583. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-11-2016-0766

Rabbitt, N., & Ghosh, B. (2016). Economic and environmental impacts of organised car sharing services: A case study of Ireland. Research in Transportation Economics, 57, 3-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2016.10.001

Rong, K., Li, B., Peng, W., Zhou, D., & Shi, X. (2021). Sharing economy platforms: Creating shared value at a business ecosystem level. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 169, Article 120804. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120804

Van Slyke, C., Ilie, V., Lou, H., & Stafford, T. (2007). Perceived critical mass and the adoption of a communication technology. European Journal of Information Systems, 16(3), 270-283. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ejis.3000680

Wappelhorst, S., Sauer, M., Hinkeldein, D., Bocherding, A., & Glaß, T. (2014). Potential of electric carsharing in urban and rural areas. Transportation Research Procedia, 4, 374-386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2014.11.028

Wirtz, J., So, K. K. F., Mody, M. A., Liu, S. Q., & Chun, H. H. (2019). Platforms in the peer-to-peer sharing economy. Journal of Service Management, 30(4), 452-483. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOSM-11-2018-0369

Zulauf, K., & Wagner, R. (2021). Urban and rural sustainability: Divergent concepts and their consequences for marketing. Frontiers in Sustainability, 2, Article 670866. https://doi.org/10.3389/frsus.2021.670866

Downloads

Published

2025-12-22

How to Cite

SAGLIA, M., ZULAUF, K., DION, P., & WAGNER, R. (2025). Urban Car-Sharing Viability in the Knowledge Economy: A Monte Carlo-Based Planning Tool for Shared Mobility Policy. Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, 13(4), 340–356. Retrieved from https://www.managementdynamics.ro/index.php/journal/article/view/727

Issue

Section

Articles