“The instability is a bit off-putting”: a social practice perspective on framing disruptive bicycle and e-scooter sharing services
From the introduction of free-floating shared bicycles in Australia in mid-2017, followed by electric kick scooters (e-scooters) from November 2018, there have been 34 commercial operations across 15 companies and 12 cities. In the first few years of dockless bikes and scooters on Australian streets, these schemes became synonymous with hazards, dumped bikes and scooters, urban clutter, and misuse of these devices. Users of bike and scooter schemes are also believed to exhibit irresponsible or risky behaviour when compared to those who own a bike or e-scooter, as has been observed in Brisbane.
Through 2020 our transport habits and needs were re-evaluated, and the place and purpose of shared micromobility was also scrutinised. Both of Australia’s docked bikeshare schemes, Melbourne Bike Share in Melbourne (2010-2019) and CityCycle in Brisbane (2010-2020) were closed, the latter of which has been replaced with two commercial e-bike schemes from Neuron and Beam. Adelaide offered a two-year permit to Neuron and Ride, but those who were not offered permits criticised the permit process.
Nonetheless, governments in Australia continue to experiment with shared micromobility with new operators and modes in both regional and metropolitan councils. Since January 2020 e-scooters have travelled over 1 million kilometers, e-scooters have been found to have a positive influence on toturist spending, and bike and scooter sharing in Brisbane are currently being used as part of a Mobility-as-a-service pilot in Brisbane.
