J Urban Health https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-023-00731-0 REVIEW Public Health‑Led Insights on Electric Micro‑mobility Adoption and Use: a Scoping Review Alexandra Bretones · Oriol Marquet · Carolyn Daher · Laura Hidalgo · Mark Nieuwenhuijsen · Carme Miralles‑Guasch · Natalie Mueller Accepted: 14 April 2023 © The Author(s) 2023 Abstract The advent of electric micro-mobility determinants that pertain to intrinsic motivations and (EMM) has transformed the urban mobility landscape, deterrents of individuals. Our findings reveal that with projections indicating a 5–10% increase in its EMM vehicles are widely perceived as a cost-effective, modal share in European cities by 2030. In this scop- flexible, ad hoc, and fast mode of transportation within ing review, we aimed to comprehensively examine the urban areas, augmenting accessibility and connectivity. key determinants of EMM adoption and usage from Additionally, the lightweight, foldable, and transport- a public health perspective. Sixty-seven articles were able nature of these vehicles is highly appreciated by included in the analysis, primarily covering e-bikes users. However, several barriers have also been iden- and e-scooters. The determinants were categorised tified, including inadequate infrastructure and end-of- into two broad categories: (1) contextual determinants trip facilities, limited capability to traverse diverse ter- that encompass enabling and hindering factors related rains and trip scenarios, acquisition and maintenance to legal frameworks, transportation systems and infra- costs, limited carrying capacities, technical failures, structure, and technology, and (2) individual-level and accident risks. Our results suggest that the inter- play of contextual enablers and barriers and personal motivations and deterrents drive the emergence, adop- A. Bretones (*) · O. Marquet · C. Miralles‑Guasch tion, and usage of EMM. Hence, a comprehensive Research Group On Mobility, Transportation and Territory understanding of both contextual and individual-level (GEMOTT), Geography Department, Autonomous determinants is crucial for ensuring a sustainable and University of Barcelona (UAB), Barcelona, Spain e-mail: alexandra.bretones@uab.cat healthy uptake of EMM. O. Marquet · C. Miralles‑Guasch Keywords Electric micro-mobility · e-Scooters · Institute of Environmental Science and Technology e-Bikes · Determinants · Public health · Scoping (ICTA), Autonomous University of Barcelona (UAB), Barcelona, Spain review C. Daher · L. Hidalgo · M. Nieuwenhuijsen · N. Mueller Abbreviations ISGlobal, Barcelona, Spain EMM Electric micro-mobility C. Daher · L. Hidalgo · M. Nieuwenhuijsen · N. Mueller e-PMVs Electric personal mobility vehicles Universitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF), Barcelona, Spain e-PTDs Electric personal transportation devices TRID Transportation Research International C. Daher · L. Hidalgo · M. Nieuwenhuijsen · N. Mueller Documentation CIBER Epidemiología Y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Madrid, Spain WoS Web of Science Vol.: (0123456789) 13 A. B. Diaz et al. Introduction Christoforou et al.[16] understanding of EMM. We are excluding larger and more powerful vehicles, such Electric micro-mobility (EMM) is emerging as a as e-mopeds and e-motorcycles. transformative transport mode in cities globally, These new e-powered micro-vehicles are gain- filling a previously undefined niche in terms of its ing popularity in cities worldwide, and a 5–10% users, opportunities, risks, and impacts. As cities increase in EMM modal share is expected by 2030 strive towards a sustainable and zero-carbon future, in the European Region [17]. With this rise in popu- the consideration of these new modes of transport larity, it is important to understand the determinants becomes increasingly crucial in discussions surround- of EMM use, i.e. what enables and motivates users, ing urban mobility and environmental sustainability. and what barriers and deterrents they encounter. Cur- For instance, EMM is believed to have the potential rent research shows how EMM can provide individu- to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, air pol- als with an accessible, relatively cheap and fast way lution, and congestion [1–3], while increasing acces- to move around [18, 19], increase accessibility and sibility and connectivity, and facilitating first- and last- connectivity for certain groups, and have important mile mobility [4–8] [4–7, 9]. Moreover, the user travel equity implications in terms of transport choices and experience while riding may be enhanced, as these associated health and well-being outcomes. Accord- new modes can provide a more engaging experience ing to various studies, EMM perceived benefits with the travel environment, a joyful alternative to get- include convenience, freedom, flexibility, and over- ting around, and even impact health and well-being coming car dependence [20, 21]; provision of exer- outcomes [10–12]. cise [22–24]; enabling mobility for users with physi- EMM includes a range of small-sized, lightweight, cal limitations [12, 25]; reduced travel time [16, 26, electrically powered vehicles that, typically, facilitate 27]; economic savings [16, 27]; respect for the envi- short trips of up to 10 km, and thereby extend the dis- ronment [23, 27]; fun, enjoyability, and enhanced tances users can travel without a car [13, 14]. In Euro- human experience [16, 24]; and general contribution pean settings, EMM vehicles can usually carry one or to increased well-being [24]. two passengers, and sometimes cargo, operate at low At the same time, certain deterrents and barriers have speeds (i.e. up to 25 km/h), but sometimes up to mod- been also identified such as safety concerns [27–30]; erate speeds (i.e. up to 45 km/h) [15], and they can lack of appropriate infrastructure, poor road conditions, be privately owned or accessed through sharing sys- and lack of end-of-trip facilities [24, 28, 29, 31]; traf- tems. Vehicles that commonly meet the rather broad fic noise and air pollution [32]; vehicle acquisition and EMM definition are e-bikes, e-trikes or e-cargo bikes, maintenance costs [33, 34]; limited carrying capacity and various forms of e-scooters and e-rickshaws, but [21, 35]; fear of theft and vandalism [12, 36, 37]; and also one-wheeled, two (or more)-wheeled balancing fear of technical weaknesses and failure [12, 24]. boards, including e-skateboards and Segways. The These positive and negative determinants might classification of EMM is a complex issue, in part vary widely according to contextual settings, trans- due to the lack of consistent legal definitions across port needs, habits and patterns, individual percep- European countries and local jurisdictions. Therefore, tions, and previous experiences. Thus, given the pre- EMM taxonomy and classifications have usually been dicted increase in EMM usage in urban settings and defined by the combination of two of the following the acknowledged relationship between modal choice elements: vehicle weight, vehicle maximum speed, and health, it is necessary to include a public health and vehicle capacity However, this conventional viewpoint to better understand the impact of EMM approach has been challenged by authors such as on the health and well-being of individuals and com- Christoforou et al.[16], who propose a more mobility- munities, as the use of EMM can have a significant oriented definition that considers EMM to encompass impact on public health outcomes, for instance on all modes of transportation that enable users to seam- physical activity, air and noise pollution, safety and lessly transition between pedestrian and vehicular accessibility, among others. Understanding the factors modes as necessary. In this scoping review, we follow that influence EMM adoption can help identify and Vol:. (1234567890) 13 Public Health-Led Insightson Electric Micro-Mobility Adoption and Use address barriers and promote its adoption as a healthy vehicles as small-sized, electrically powered vehicles and sustainable transportation option. Furthermore, operating at speeds of up to a maximum of 25 km/h. understanding the deterrents can help in the design and implementation of policies and infrastructure that Identifying Relevant Studies can mitigate these barriers and increase safety for all. This scoping review summarises the existing liter- This review derives from a larger, primary scoping ary landscape on the determinants of EMM use and exercise that identified the determinants of EMM adoption from a public health perspective, to help use from a public health perspective, but also with European authorities better understand EMM patterns the objective to gather all available research regard- and user behaviours. ing health and safety impacts derived from the use of EMM including physical activity, noise and air pol- lution, safety risk, social cohesion, accessibility, and more. For this primary review, queries were carried Methods out according to a systematic search strategy, using a combination of keywords covering EMM (i.e. the A scoping literature review was selected as the most vehicles) AND health and safety pathways and mech- appropriate method for research objectives. In con- anisms AND health, safety, and well-being outcomes trast with a systematic review—a comprehensive and (see an example in Table 1). The pathway and mecha- rigorous method of reviewing the literature on a spe- nism categories analysed were the following: air pol- cific research question, following a predefined and lution, noise, thermal comfort, route choice and natu- systematic process to identify, appraise, and synthe- ral outdoor environments, physical activity, safety sise all relevant studies on a topic—scoping reviews and crash risk, trip purpose and motivation, acces- are a useful tool for assessing the breadth and focus sibility and connectivity, infrastructure and manage- of a body of literature on a specific topic, provid- ment, regulation and compliance, use and behav- ing an overview of the volume and scope of stud- ior, Covid-19 and future trends. We used the AND ies available, and particularly useful for identifying Boolean operator to create the final queries (shown in emerging evidence when the research questions are Table 1). The search was conducted in four different not yet clearly defined. Scoping reviews are typically databases: PubMed, Web of Science (WoS), Scopus, used when the topic is broad and there is a large vol- and Transport Research International Documentation ume of literature available; the research question is (TRID), to cover and reach all the topical dimensions: still evolving or not well-defined; there is a need to Web of Science and Scopus provide a multidiscipli- identify the key themes and concepts related to the nary body of literature, PubMed covers biomedical topic; the goal is to provide an overview of the exist- and health sciences, and TRID that covers transporta- ing evidence rather than a comprehensive evaluation tion sciences. Prior to the present research stage, to of individual studies; and/or there is limited time or our knowledge, researchers reached a consensus on resources available for a full systematic review. In predefined umbrella health and safety pathway cat- fact, scoping reviews can help to guide the design of egories, that were thought to be relevant in the discus- more specific and detailed systematic reviews by pro- sion on health and safety impacts of EMM [40]. viding an understanding of the current state of knowl- All searches were limited to the English language, edge on a topic [38]. As EMM is an emerging prac- and to articles published between 2010 and 2021. All tice, a scoping review was judged as most suitable to types of study designs were included: scoping review, identify and map the key concepts, ideas, and gaps in systematic review, meta-analysis, ecological, longitu- the existing literature [38]. We followed the System- dinal, cross-sectional, case–control, intervention, and atic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guide- observational. For review inclusion, the studies had to lines for the reporting of scoping literature reviews cover determinants of EMM use and a health or safety [39]. In the scope of this review, we defined EMM pathway or mechanism of EMM linking to human Vol.: (0123456789) 13 A. B. Diaz et al. Table 1  Selected keywords for the primary literature search by health pathway category Keywords EMM Health pathway (example: Health and well-being outcome air pollution) electric micromobility OR AND air pollution OR contamina- AND health OR health effect OR health impact OR e-micromobility OR electric tion OR greenhouse gases acute OR chronic OR well-being OR health two-wheeler OR electrification OR GHG OR dioxide impact assessment OR health impact evalu- OR electric transport OR e-bike nitrogen OR NO2 OR par- ation OR disease OR disability OR morbid- OR ebike OR electric bike OR ticulate matter OR PM10 ity OR mortality OR disability-adjusted life electric bicycle OR e-bicycle OR PM2.5 OR sulphur year OR DALY OR years of life lost OR OR e-cycling OR pedelec OR dioxide OR SO2 OR ozone YLL OR years lived with disability OR YLD electric pedelec OR e-pedelec OR O3 OR lead OR Pb OR quality-adjusted life-year OR QALY OR pedelec mobility OR electric OR methane OR CH4 OR OR health burden OR burden of disease scooter OR e-scooter OR carbon dioxide OR CO2 OR mental health OR quality of life OR life electric kick-scooter OR electric OR carbon emissions OR satisfaction OR life expectancy OR happiness motorbike OR e-motorbike OR carbon footprint OR depression OR anxiety OR dementia OR electric motorcycle OR e-motor- physical health OR cardiovascular disease cycle OR electric moped scooter OR respiratory disease OR cancer OR OR electric moped OR e-moped overweight OR obesity OR annoyance OR OR Segway OR e-skateboard sleep disturbance OR injury OR fatality OR OR electric skateboard OR accident OR incident OR severity OR fall OR e-longboard OR electric long- crash OR hospitalisation OR emergency room board OR hoverboard visit OR health cost OR productivity loss OR work absence health. Searches in all four databases resulted in a total as the aim of this study is to reflect the current of 12,214 hits, as shown in Table 2 and Fig. 1. European EMM landscape, and it was thought that Only studies covering EMM vehicles that met EMM determinants might vary in other parts of the the definition provided above were included (i.e. world in accordance with local regulations, transport light vehicles, powered by electricity, not exceeding systems, user needs, behaviours, and experiences. a speed of 25 km/h). Therefore, e-mopeds, e-motorcycles, and speed-pedelecs were not Study Selection included, as they likely exceed the speed definition. The scoping review is based on the international Regarding the current scoping review on the literature if authors of papers reviewed have judged determinants of EMM, of all the articles identified discussed concepts to be universally relevant in the as eligible, we only focused on the publications discussion on EMM determinants, irrespective of dealing with determinants. A total of 67 articles geographical context. However, the presented case were included for analysis, covering the enablers, studies were selected only for European settings, motivations, barriers, and deterrents. We decided Table 2  Search strategy Database Focus Publication date Hits database results PubMed Biomedical and health sciences 2010–2021 1385 Web of Science (WoS) Multidisciplinary 2010–2021 3528 Scopus Multidisciplinary 2010–2021 5553 Transport Research Interna- Transportation science 2010–2021 1748 tional Documentation (TRID) Total hits 12,214 Vol:. (1234567890) 13 Public Health-Led Insightson Electric Micro-Mobility Adoption and Use Fig. 1  PRISMA flow PubMed Web of Science Scopus TRID diagram (n = 1,385) (n = 3,528) (n = 5,553) (n = 1,748) Identification Total articles Duplicated articles (n = 12,214) (n = 7,937) Articles without duplicates Excluded based on title screening (n = 4,277) (n = 1,725) Screening Articles with relevant title Excluded based on abstract screening (n = 2,552) (n = 1,831) Articles with relevant abstract Excluded based on full text screening wi (n = 721) (n = 521) Eligibility Eligible articles Included through reference (n = 200) (n = 17) Included Included articles (n = 67) to classify the determinants between contextual removed, and title and abstract screening were con- enablers and barriers that refer to factors that operate ducted. Publications meeting the established inclu- at a larger or more macro level and that are related sion criteria were selected for full-text screening. to the existing legal frameworks, transport system Full texts were sourced, and full text screening was provisions, availability of dedicated infrastructure, conducted. A descriptive analysis was carried out technological enablers, and other wider, contextual to gather information about the selected studies factors (e.g. topography, climate, etc.); and personal including their publication year, location, method- motivations and deterrents, that are those relating ology, and outcomes. The main outcomes related to to individuals’ preferences and intrinsic behaviours the specific topic of the review were identified and and depend on personal factors such as age, income, listed. This process was done by two reviewers, AB occupation, and lifestyle, including convenience, and NM, and a narrative summary was given for cost, time, health, environmental concerns, and each outcome. The significance of the findings in social status. relation to the research question and implications All identified records were uploaded to the Men- for research, policy, and practice were discussed, deley references management software (https://​ highlighting any evidence gaps and important priori- www.​mende​ley.​com). Duplicate publications were ties. All steps were carried out independently by the Vol.: (0123456789) 13 A. B. Diaz et al. two researchers (AB, NM). Any discrepancies were America, 6% (n = 3) China, and 8% (n = 4) other resolved by consensus. countries including Singapore, New Zealand, Israel, and Saudi Arabia. In terms of vehicle type, 71% (n = 36) of articles Results focused on e-bikes, and 27% (n = 14) focused on e-scooters. Only one study included both vehicles Articles Retrieved simultaneously. Moreover, 43% (n = 22) of articles focused on privately owned vehicles, while 41% As the result of our search strategy for our primary (n = 21) explored EMM sharing systems and shared review, and after the removal of duplicates, 4277 arti- vehicles, and finally 16% (n = 8) included both pri- cles were title-screened, 2552 articles were abstract- vately owned and shared EMMs in their analyses. screened, and 721 articles were full-text-screened Study populations and sample sizes were hetero- (Fig. 1). After the full-text screening, 200 articles geneous across the studies. Empirical studies, includ- qualified for review inclusion. Additional cross-read- ing focus groups and interview methods, consisted ing and reference screening added another 17 arti- of sample sizes of 8 to 65 individuals, while studies cles. Finally, 217 articles were included in the larger, using survey methods included responses of 200 to primary scoping review, covering the landscape of more than 100,000 individuals. Some studies tar- EMM determinants and health and safety pathways. geted the entire population to study the populations’ For the analysis presented here, of these 217 arti- mobility behaviours, and/or their willingness to adopt cles, 67 were identified to be specifically related to EMM, while others focused on the users of the trans- the determinants of EMM usage (i.e. in the European port mode being studied, or on specific target groups Region). such as students, employees, older people, parents with children, inactive/sedentary people, or car own- ers. Additionally, there were studies comparing EMM Articles Characteristics users and non-users. Of the 67 articles included in this scoping review, Literature Reviews 85% (n = 57) were peer-reviewed research articles, and 15% (n = 10) were grey literature. Most of the Apart from the observational studies, this scop- peer-reviewed research was published in transport ing review also included literature reviews. 25% and mobility-related journals (47%), as well as in (n = 4) of reviews focused on e-bikes, while 31% health and environmental science journals (32%). (n = 5) focused on e-scooters. The remaining 44% of The grey literature contained eight reports and one reviews (n = 7) included EMM modes in general, by project presentation. Regarding the time of publica- using different terminologies such as electric two- tion, there was a steep increase in research on EMM wheelers, electric personal transportation devices since 2018, and 76% (n = 51) of the articles were pub- (e-PTDs), and electric personal mobility vehicles lished between 2018 and 2021. Of the total number (e-PMVs). of 67 publications, 76% (n = 51) presented an obser- vational/cross-sectional research design, while 24% (n = 16) were literature reviews. E‑micro‑mobility determinants Observational Studies This section lays out the determinants of EMM identified across the included studies. Table 3 and Geographically, a total of 65% (n = 33) of articles Table 4 summarise the contextual enablers and bar- originated from European research centres, predomi- riers, as well as individuals’ motivations for and nantly in Norway, Poland, Netherlands, Portugal, the deterrents against engaging in EMM use and list United Kingdom, Denmark, and Belgium. Of the determinants according to commonness of reporting remaining articles, 21% (n = 11) were from North (i.e. most to least commonly reported). Vol:. (1234567890) 13 Public Health-Led Insightson Electric Micro-Mobility Adoption and Use Table 3  Contextual enablers and individuals’ motivations to engage in e-micro-mobility use, (the number in brackets represents the number of studies reporting that specific enabler) Contextual enablers Individuals’ motivations Ability to cover longer distances at higher speed Reduced travel time compared to public transport, Most (especially e-bikes) (23) car, or walking (avoidance of congestion) (23) commonly reported Cost savings in comparison to other modes Fun/enjoyment (23) (especially car) (21) Appeal to groups with lower level or no interest in Facilitation of multimodal connections with public physical activity, and enable the mobility of users transport/ Provision of first- and last mile mobility with physical limitations (22) (especially e-scooters) (16) Overcome car dependence/money-saving (22) Increase of accessibility and connectivity (14) Provision of exercise, with reduced physical Ability to expand the travel area due to electric exertion (20) support, speed, and ease of riding (14) Improved health and well-being (physical and Availability of designated, segregated, safe mental) (18) infrastructure (4) Sense of stewardship and respect for the Size, weight of vehicle, and foldability allowing environment/ seen as sustainable transport (14) them to be carried (for e-scooters) (4) Increase in travel convenience, freedom, and Sharing systems flexibility (ad-hoc travel routes) (10) Flexible and cheap access to mobility (8) Safety-efficiency alternative to COVID-19 (maintain physical distance) (5) Sharing systems Convenient, cheap, and flexible access to mobility, Least without ownership burdens (8) commonly reported Contextual Enablers for E‑micro‑mobility Use Infrastructure: a Key Element to Foster Usage Addi- tionally, the provision of designated, segregated, and Expanding Accessibility EMM was found to safe infrastructure for EMM use was repeatedly men- offer a relatively cheap and fast way to move around tioned as a crucial element with which to foster and [18, 19], expanding the area in which riders can maintain its usage [45, 51]. In terms of EMM shar- travel easily without a car (or a driving licence), ing systems, they were reported to offer a flexible, thereby, potentially increasing accessibility and relatively cheap access to mobility, and to add to the connectivity for vulnerable population groups [14]. diversity in transport opportunities [52]. For instance, e-bikes offer the ability to cover longer distances at a higher speed, compared to conven- Personal Motivations for E‑micro‑mobility Use tional cycling or walking [24, 41–46]. An impor- tant consideration of EMM modes is the provision Convenience, Freedom, and Flexibility Accord- of first- and last-mile mobility [47] and, therefore, ing to the available evidence, various personal moti- also the facilitation of multimodal connections with vations for EMM use exist. Perceived increased public transport [33, 48–50]. If vehicles are light- travel convenience, freedom, flexibility, and over- weight, foldable, and can be carried (i.e. especially coming car dependence [20, 21, 53] were found to e-scooters), they can be easily combined with, and be important to users. EMM allows the establish- taken on, public transport [33, 37]. ment of ad hoc, flexible, and more direct travel Vol.: (0123456789) 13 A. B. Diaz et al. Table 4  Contextual barriers and individuals’ deterrents to engaging in e-micro-mobility use, (the number in brackets represents the number of studies reporting that specific barrier) Contextual barriers Individuals’ deterrents Absence of designated, segregated, safe Safety concerns, and high accident and injury risk Most infrastructure, or poor conditions of available perception (32) commonly infrastructure elements (28) reported Presence of disturbing factors (i.e., motorised Lack of end-of-trip facilities (secure and adequate traffic, traffic speed, noise, air pollution) (11) parking or storage, battery charging stations, etc.) (22) Fear of theft and vandalism (10) Unsuitable for bad weather conditions (rain, snow, Not family-friendly (limited provision to carry wind, heat) and darkness (19) children or goods (especially e-scooters) (10) Acquisition and maintenance costs (17) Range anxiety (i.e., fear of flat battery mid-journey) (7) Weight of the vehicle and batteries (17) Social stigma (i.e., cheating, toys, laziness, etc.) (7) Lack of clarity over regulations and correct use (14) Fear of harassment/racial profiling (2) Concerns about negative environmental impacts of needed electricity to sustain vehicles, life cycle of Sharing systems EMM, manufacturing, and battery disposal (13) High fees (4) Limited carrying or loading capacities of goods or Lack of awareness and knowledge on use and passengers/ difficulty to integrate multiple system features (3) destinations (11) Exclusion of some collectives as systems require a Fear of technical weaknesses and failure (e.g., credit or debit card, as well as smartphones (3) failure or explosion of batteries) (8) Lack of protective gear (e.g., lights, mirrors, seatbelts, turning signals, etc.) (3) Sharing systems Location and unequal distribution of stations and Least vehicles (9) commonly reported routes [54], which also contributes to overcoming Physical Activity and Mobility for Users with Limi‑ car dependence, while avoiding traffic congestion tations EMM also offers the benefits of performing [24, 25, 27, 55]. Reduced travel time, in comparison some type of physical activity, without leading to physi- to public transport, car use or walking, factoring in cal exhaustion, assessed as especially important when waiting times for public transport, travelling dur- riding uphill. In this sense, reduced sweating and need ing rush hour, and time spent looking for car park- of having to shower, were identified as important moti- ing, was also identified as a motivation for EMM vators [12, 23–25, 41, 42, 46, 53, 58]. In fact, studies use [16, 24, 26, 27, 35, 41, 56–58]. Potential travel found that e-bikes enable travelling longer distances time savings also relate to easy parking and stor- and reducing barriers regarding for people who do age (especially for e-scooters) [24, 34, 37]. Potential not engage in active transport, such as low perceived economic savings, especially in comparison to car or actual fitness levels, hills, sweating, fatigue, and use, were another reported motivator for adopting weather conditions [43, 44, 56, 60, 61]. Some studies EMM [16, 23, 27, 59]. noted that e-bikes strongly appeal to groups with lower Vol:. (1234567890) 13 Public Health-Led Insightson Electric Micro-Mobility Adoption and Use levels of or no interest in physical activity, indicating fully benefit from access to one, can be a motivator that e-bikes can attract new user groups who might find for EMM use [33, 66]. EMM sharing systems were a regular bike to be a non-alternative [37, 53]. Bourne found to be potential competitors for car and moped et al. [36], for instance, reported older adults as being sharing systems, holding some significant advantages motivated to ride e-bikes, due to the physical activity against these modes, such as not requiring a driving provisions and associated health benefits. Additionally, licence or, possibly, an age threshold [33]. EMM was reported to enable mobility for users with physical limitations [12, 21, 25]. In comparison to con- Contextual Barriers for E‑micro‑mobility Use ventional active transport, EMM was perceived to be more suitable for everyday use when physically tired, Lack of Appropriate Infrastructure, Costs, and dressed in formal attire, and carrying personal effects Limited Capacities The absence of appropriate [43, 62]. infrastructure, for example designated and segre- gated, and poor conditions of available infrastructure Environmental Stewardship, Outdoor Experi‑ elements (e.g. uneven pavement, gravel) were impor- ence, and Well‑being Other EMM motivators tant barriers to EMM use [12, 24, 27–29, 31, 36, 51, included a sense of stewardship and respect for the 53]. Likewise, the general lack of end-of-trip facilities environment [23, 27], and the perception of using (e.g. secure and adequate parking or storage, charging sustainable modes due to running on electricity stations) has been noted as an important infrastruc- [54]. Technology interest and innovativeness were ture-related deterrent for EMM ownership [36]. also presented as inherent motivators to adopt Moreover, vehicle acquisition and maintenance EMM use. Felix et al. [63] stated that e-bikes can costs were generally found as deterrents [12, 24, 33, be perceived as “trendy” when compared to con- 34, 46]. Limited carrying or loading capacities of ventional bikes, which can be an additional moti- goods or passengers (e.g. children), in comparison vator to engage in e-cycling. to car use, can be barriers, especially when needing Inhaling “fresh air” and being outdoors [24, 64]; to combine several activities in one journey [12, 21, fun, enjoyability, enhanced human experience [16, 24, 25, 28, 35, 41]. Particularly, private e-bikes were 21, 24, 25, 57]; “feeling like a little kid again” [55]; found to not be the best vehicle for multimodality curiosity and fascination [31]; and the general con- purposes, as their size and weight make it difficult to tribution to increased well-being [24, 61], were all swiftly hop off, when disembarking from trains and found to play positive roles, and strengthened the buses [35, 36, 45]. In addition, the weight of the vehi- willingness to adopt and use EMM. cles, the batteries, and the general fear of technical The more recent studies that were conducted in issues or eventual failures are important concerns too the context of the COVID-19 pandemic found EMM [12, 24, 45]. to be perceived as a safe alternative with respect to COVID-19 infection risk. EMM allows people to Environmental and Weather Concerns, and Legal maintain physical and social distancing, at a time Framework There also appear to be some wor- when individuals are/were hesitant to use public ries about the electricity grid capacity that is needed transport for fear of potential contamination [28, 49, to sustain an e-vehicle fleet [67], and their resulting 59, 61, 65]. Continued appreciation of transport that emissions and environmental impacts [45]. Concerns ensures physical distancing and privacy was found to regarding the life cycle assessment of the production be important in the post-pandemic period [59, 66]. and discarding of e-scooters and their batteries are con- sidered by some EMM users as negative environmental Convenient, Easy, and Affordable Sharing Sys‑ impacts [54]. Additionally, weather conditions of rain, tems Finally, with respect to sharing systems, users wind, snow, cold, or heat were also found to be poten- were found to appreciate convenient, easy, relatively tial barriers [2, 12, 24, 28, 35, 41], as well as travelling cheap, and widespread access to mobility, without the in the dark [67]. Finally, the lack of clarity of the exist- burdens of vehicle ownership. Not having to buy, care ing legal framework and the correct use of vehicles for, maintain, and park/store the e-micro vehicle, but were also mentioned as important barriers [37]. Vol.: (0123456789) 13 A. B. Diaz et al. Accessibility, Availability, and Quality Concerns of sharing systems were identified as not very family- Sharing Systems Regarding sharing systems, acces- friendly, with bikes being designed for adults only, and sibility to locations of docking-system stations, and the no provision for carrying children [29, 33, 72]. Limited availability and unequal distribution of non-docked distribution and accessibility of sharing stations/vehi- vehicles across the city, were identified as further barri- cles, and high access fees and user costs were reported ers [29, 30, 33, 68]. Among French survey respondents, as barriers [30], together with requiring a credit or almost 25% stated that they gave up renting e-scooters debit card as a point of entry to the system, as well as because none were available nearby [21]. Vehicle safety a smartphone to access a supportive application. These and quality concerns of sharing system vehicles were barriers can lead to exclusion of socioeconomically identified as issues [68]. According to Kwiatkowski et al. disadvantaged or elderly people [21, 29], who do not [69], their study results revealed that, in cities with gen- possess the required resources or know-how to access erally low levels of conventional cycling, the availability sharing systems. of an e-bike sharing system would probably not be a suf- ficient incentive to start cycling as a means of transport. Discussion and Conclusions Personal Deterrents for E‑micro‑mobility Use Based on a scoping review, we explored the landscape Safety and Security Concerns The most important of the EMM literature and identified the determinants personal deterrents to engaging in EMM use were of EMM use in European settings. These determinants traffic safety concerns, and the increased accident and were further classified into either contextual/personal injury risk perception [12, 24, 27–30, 35, 51, 53, 68]. enablers or contextual/personal barriers. Our findings The presence of motorised traffic, traffic speed, and suggest a wide array of determinants that demonstrate noise were perceived deterrents, as well as air pollu- the complexity and diversity of factors influencing the tion concerns [29, 32, 51]. Fear of theft and vandal- emergence, adoption, and sustained use of these new ism, including reservations about secure and appro- modes of transport in European cities. priate public parking, was also mentioned in several case studies [12, 24, 35, 36, 45]. What Determines E‑micro‑mobility Use? Perceived Social Stigma Another personal barrier Regarding contextual enablers, EMM was found to frequently found in EMM studies, is the existence of a offer a relatively cheap, flexible, ad hoc, and fast way to perceived social stigma (i.e. social shaming) that can be move within urban areas, expanding the area riders can linked with e-bike use. E-bikes are often (falsely) per- easily travel without a car or a driving licence, thereby ceived as a form of “cheating” and not viewed as real increasing accessibility and connectivity within cities. bikes by cycling enthusiasts [41, 70]. Similarly, EMM Although to date, findings on EMM being a first- and vehicles are often perceived as “toys”, and their riders last-mile solution are mixed [16, 23, 32], users seem are deemed “lazy”, “overweight”, or “cheating” [12, 35, to appreciate the convenience of vehicles that are light- 37, 45, 71]. In the case of e-bikes, users are perceived weight, foldable, and can be carried on public trans- as “old” [69], and these bikes are not yet accepted as port. Moreover, the provision of dedicated infrastruc- transport modes by certain collectives [54]. Edge et al. ture for EMM appears to be a crucial element, with [35] speculated that if e-bikes resembled conventional which to foster and maintain safe usage. Our findings bikes, they would potentially get less scrutiny. highlight the lack of appropriate infrastructure and end-of-trip facilities as the main contextual barrier. Shared Mobility Programmes: Addressing Acces‑ Considering personal motivations to adopt EMM, sibility and Affordability There are a series of per- users value convenience, reduced travel times, low sonal barriers related to sharing system programmes. cost, low physical activity requirements, environ- Current non-users expressed a general lack of aware- mental sustainability, component innovation, and the ness on how to access or use these systems, which thrill and enjoyment of riding. Regarding conveni- leads to being intimidated to figure out how they ence, users seem to value freedom, and flexibility in work or how to gain access to the system [29]. E-bike deciding on travel routes and planning, reducing car Vol:. (1234567890) 13 Public Health-Led Insightson Electric Micro-Mobility Adoption and Use dependence, congestion, and other car-related incon- to engaging in EMM use concerned safety and the veniences. When factoring in waiting times for pub- increased accident and injury risk perception. The lic transport, rush hour traffic, and time spent look- presence of disruptive factors such as dense motor- ing for car parking spaces, EMM was assessed to be ised traffic, traffic speed, noise, and air pollution, an attractive time-saving competitor to other modes together with the fear of theft and vandalism, were of transport. Economic savings seems to also be an further identified as important deterrents. important personal argument for why people might Lastly, for the specific case of both docked and engage in EMM use, especially when compared to car free-floating sharing systems, reviewed studies high- use. However, high vehicle acquisition and mainte- lighted the reduced burdens of ownership and the nance costs were also reported as a contextual barrier convenience linked to the low levels of care and when referring to privately owned EMM vehicles. maintenance that are required as the main motivators Physical activity was not found to be a significant to use these systems. Yet, docking locations, vehicle factor in attracting new EMM users. Rather, it was the availability, and unequal vehicle distribution across lower physical activity levels that are required to oper- the city were identified as the main contextual barri- ate EMM which attracted users, especially in the case ers. Likewise, personal deterrents were technological of e-bikes. EMM modes appear to be appealing for problems, lack of awareness of the features of the sys- people with no or little interest in the physical activity tem, difficulty in determining how to use the system, component of transportation. Most importantly, EMM as well as system cost and high fees. Moreover, these seems to be more suitable for everyday use in adverse shared systems are sometimes perceived as excluding conditions (cold weather, wearing formal clothing, the socioeconomically disadvantaged or elderly peo- physical tiredness) than other traditional active trans- ple as the service requires a credit or debit card as a port modes, which would indicate a growth potential point of entry, as well as possession of a smartphone. for EMM, in some geographies and within a wider variety of social groups with different travel needs. Implications for Policy and Practice Contrarily, some studies suggested that EMM use was weather dependent, and not particularly suited to the Our findings suggest that EMM has the potential to usual conditions of rain, wind, cold, heat, or darkness. provide mobility opportunities, diversify transport, and Regarding personal motivations, reviewed studies possibly even provide environmental and health ben- have found how the environmental perception that is efits if they are properly managed. The introduction of linked to these vehicles favours their adoption, particu- e-bikes, and e-scooters, may have positive outcomes larly among the more environmentally aware groups of if they are well integrated into the existing (public) younger people. This generalised perception of envi- transport structures. EMM needs to be integrated well ronmental friendliness might clash with more recent into the existing (public) transport system, facilitate sustainability analyses which conclude that the rise of first- and last-mile mobility, and particularly encour- EMM in cities is causing an actual increase in emis- age mode shifts from private motorised transport (i.e. sions [37, 73]. Other appealing factors mentioned less cars, motorcycles), to reap the largest environmental frequently include the technological and innovation and health benefits. To do so, it is necessary to increase components of EMM and the enjoyability and personal the availability and accessibility of EMM options, such experience of riding. Interestingly, the proper device as through the expansion of charging infrastructure technology was also identified as a barrier, including and the creation of dedicated lanes. Regarding parking the increased weight of the vehicles and their batter- and storage, safe, secure, and vehicle-appropriate park- ies, and concerns about potential technical failures (e.g. ing spaces are needed at different locations (e.g. work, battery explosion anxiety). public transport stops, kindergartens, shopping centres, In relation to other contextual barriers, apart from other points of interest), including overnight parking. the absence of satisfactory infrastructure, the limited Additionally, measures are required to improve the capacity of EMM to cover all terrains and trip char- affordability of privately owned devices, such as sub- acteristics was also mentioned, together with the sidies or reduced tariffs. EMM use is thought to pro- reduced carrying or loading capacities of goods and vide a range of benefits at the individual level, such as passengers. The most important personal deterrents perceived increased well-being, enjoyability, flexibility Vol.: (0123456789) 13 A. B. Diaz et al. and freedom, and money- and time-savings that can be EMM environmental benefits may be overestimated capitalised on. by some individuals, as this information is not widely For EMM to become a viable and safe mobility known by its current or potential users. alternative for increasing numbers of people around It is important to note that all these policy recom- Europe, a clear legal framework that prevents conflicts mendations will also depend on the different levels of with other road users is needed. This literature review government and stakeholders that may be involved in has identified traffic safety concerns as the main barrier implementing policy changes related to EMM, as well for adoption among potential users. Authorities should as the potential barriers and facilitators to implement- not only address this issue, but also create and dissemi- ing policy changes. At the local level, decisions related nate clear rules and guidance regarding which infra- to EMM may include the installation of charging infra- structures EMM is supposed to use (e.g. this would structure and the creation of dedicated lanes. Local gov- work best if they are designated and segregated), and ernments may also be responsible for enforcing safety which other safety and public order requirements are regulations and monitoring the use of EMM in their in place (e.g. parking requirements, maximum speeds jurisdictions. At the state level, decisions may include allowed, minimum user age, safety, and visibility gear). regulations related to the operation and licencing of Moreover, clear enforcement of established rules is EMM companies and operators, as well as the devel- also necessary to avoid conflicts and ensure a safe co- opment of policies to promote their use. At the country existence, and appropriate public space allocation and level, decisions may include regulations related to safety usage (e.g. avoidance of “cluttering”). and operation, as well as the development of national Several measures could be implemented to make transportation policies that incorporate EMM and cor- the use of EMM more socially accessible. In the first responding regulatory frameworks. In any case, the instance, design could focus on easing access and use level of government that is responsible for making deci- for certain collectives (e.g. women, elderly, cargo, sions related to EMM may vary depending on the spe- and delivery), thus reducing the vehicle weight and cific issue and the country or region. The same applies increasing stability and manoeuvrability. Vehicles to the success of these potential measures. Successes could be made generally more cargo- and family- could vary across different towns and cities, as different friendly by allowing installations to carry goods and jurisdictions may have different needs and resources. child seats. Sharing systems could offer alternative Success in certain locations than others depends on access paths, that do not necessarily involve access factors such as population density, existing transporta- to the latest smartphone technology or using debit tion infrastructure, and cultural attitudes towards EMM. and credit cards. This would require an alternative Therefore, it is crucial to consider the local context payment system with a physical infrastructure such and the specific needs of different communities when as kiosks or rental stations to pay by cash. Also, pre- developing and implementing policy recommendations paid cards could be accepted so they can be loaded related to EMM. Finally, additional research, discus- with funds prior to the rental. These measures would sion, and communication are essential among authori- help reduce discrimination against certain communi- ties, researchers, and practitioners to improve current ties. Our review has also found that there is a strong mobility systems, make evidence-based decisions, and identification of EMM as a sustainable alternative to potentiate positive (environmental and health) impacts traditional transport modes. This contrasts heavily of EMM use, while mitigating negative effects. with recent literature pointing to the contrary, suggest- ing that for instance when EMM replaces other active Acknowledgements This paper was funded by the project PID2019‐104344RB‐I00 funded by Ministerio de Ciencia forms of transport such as walking or biking it would e Innovación MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033. OM is be causing a damage to the environment by increasing funded by a Ramón y Cajal fellowship (RYC‐2020‐ 029441‐I) emissions, while there exist environmental challenges awarded by Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación. AB has a PhD posed by the manufacture and disposal of batteries, if grant by the Agency of Management of University and Research Grants (AGAUR, 2021 FI_BDNS 525925). The funders had the whole life cycle of these vehicles is examined [35, no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision 67, 74–76]. These authors highlight the need to raise to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. This study was awareness about the real implications of EMM and supported by the Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación (Spain, its impact on the environment. Hence, it seems that MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033). Vol:. (1234567890) 13 Public Health-Led Insightson Electric Micro-Mobility Adoption and Use Funding Open Access Funding provided by Universitat Auton- Assist Technol. 2016;11(7):558–63. https://​doi.​org/​10.​ oma de Barcelona. 3109/​17483​107.​2015.​10273​01. 11. Porcelli P, Ungar M, Liebenberg L, Trépanier N. (Micro) Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Com- mobility, disability and resilience: exploring well-being mons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits among youth with physical disabilities. Disabil Soc. use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any 2014;29(6):863–76. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​09687​599.​2014.​ medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the 902360. original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Crea- 12. Jones T, Harms L, Heinen E. Motives, perceptions and tive Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The experiences of electric bicycle owners and implications for images or other third party material in this article are included health, wellbeing and mobility. J Transp Geogr. 2016;53:41– in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated 9. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jtran​geo.​2016.​04.​006. otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not 13. Milakis D, Gedhardt L, Ehebrecht D, Lenz B. Is micro- included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your mobility sustainable? An overview of implications for intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds accessibility, air pollution, safety, physical activity and the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly subjective wellbeing. Handb Sustain Transp. Published from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit online December 18, 2020:180–189. https://​doi.​org/​10.​ http://​creat​iveco​mmons.​org/​licen​ses/​by/4.​0/. 4337/​97817​89900​477.​00030 14. Yanocha D, Allan M. Maximizing micromobility: unlock- ing opportunities to integrate micromobility. Institute for Transportation and Development Policy; 2021. https://​ www.​itdp.​org/​publi​cation/​maxim​izing​‐micro​mobil​ity/. References Accessed 22 Oct 2021 15. European Parliament and the European Council. Regula- 1. Hwang JJ. Sustainable transport strategy for promoting tion (EU) No 168/2013 of the European parliament and zero-emission electric scooters in Taiwan. Renew Sustain of the council of 15 January 2013 on the approval and Energy Rev. 2010;14(5):1390–9. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/J.​ market surveillance of two-or three-wheel vehicles and RSER.​2010.​01.​014. quadricycles. Published online 2013. 2. Noland RB. Trip patterns and revenue of shared e-scooters 16. Christoforou Z, Gioldasis C, de Bortoli A, Seidowsky R. in Louisville, Kentucky. Transp Find. Published online Who is using e-scooters and how? Evidence from Paris. April 1, 2019. https://​doi.​org/​10.​32866/​7747 Transp Res Part D Transp Environ. 2021;92:102708. https://​ 3. Requia WJ, Mohamed M, Higgins CD, Arain A, Fergu- doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​trd.​2021.​102708. son M. How clean are electric vehicles? Evidence-based 17. McKinsey & Company. The future of micromobility: rid- review of the effects of electric mobility on air pollutants, ership and revenue after a crisis. Published 2021. https://​ greenhouse gas emissions and human health. Atmos Envi- www.​m ckin​s ey.​c om/​i ndus​t ries/​a utom​otive-​a nd-​a ssem​ ron. 2018;185:64–77. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​atmos​env.​ bly/​our-​insig​hts/​t he-​future-​of-​micro​mobil​ity-​r ider​ship-​ 2018.​04.​040. and-​reven​ue-​after-a-​crisis. Accessed 21 Oct 2021 4. Johnson R. Mobility scooters in the UK: public percep- 18. Agrawal AW, Fang K, Hooper AM, Board TR. Electric tion of their role. 2018;171(4):207-215. https://​doi.​org/​10.​ kick scooters on sidewalks in Virginia but Not in Califor- 1680/​JTRAN.​16.​00140 nia? A review of how states regulate personal transporta- 5. May E, Garrett R, Ballantyne A. Being mobile: electric tion devices. Published online 2018:17p. https://​trid.​trb.​ mobility-scooters and their use by older people. Ageing org/​view/​15728​86 Soc. 2010;30(7):1219–37. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1017/​S0144​ 19. Sikka N, Vila C, Stratton M, Ghassemi M, Pourmand A. 686X1​00003​34. Sharing the sidewalk: a case of e-scooter related pedes- 6. Metz D. Future transport technologies for an ageing soci- trian injury. Vol 37. Elsevier Inc.; 2019. https://​doi.​org/​ ety: practice and policy. Transp Sustain. 2017;10:207–20. 10.​1016/j.​ajem.​2019.​06.​017 https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​S2044-​99412​01700​00010​009. 20. Berge SH. Kickstarting micromobility – a pilot study 7. Shaheen S, Zhang H, Martin E, Guzman S. China’s on e-scooters. TØI Rep. Published online September Hangzhou Public Bicycle: understanding early adoption 2019:68p. https://​www.​toi.​no/​getfi​le.​php/​13509​32/​Publi​ and behavioral response to bikesharing. Transp Res Rec. kasjo ​ n er/ ​ T ØIrapp ​ o rter/ ​ 2 019/ ​ 1 721–2019/ ​ 1 721–2019-​ 2011;2247:33–41. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3141/​2247-​05. elekt​ronisk.​pdf. Accessed 21 Oct 2021 8. Shaheen S, Chan N. Mobility and the sharing economy: 21. McQueen M, Abou-Zeid G, MacArthur J, Clifton K. potential to overcome first-and last-mile public transit con- Transportation transformation: is micromobility making a nections. Built Environ Published online. 2016. https://​doi.​ macro impact on sustainability? J Plan Lit. 2021;36(1):46– org/​10.​7922/​G2862​DN3. 61. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​08854​12220​972696. 9. Shaheen S, Chan N. Mobility and the sharing economy: 22. Bjornara HB, Berntsen S, te Velde SJ, et al. From cars to potential to facilitate the first-and last-mile public transit bikes - the effect of an intervention providing access to dif- connections. Built Environ. 2016;42(4):573–88. https://​ ferent bike types: a randomized controlled trial. PLoS One. doi.​org/​10.​2148/​BENV.​42.4.​573. 2019;14(7). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1371/​journ​al.​pone.​02193​04 10. Pettersson I, Hagberg L, Fredriksson C, Hermansson 23. Rérat P. The rise of the e-bike: towards an extension of the LN. The effect of powered scooters on activity, participa- practice of cycling? Mobilities. 2021;16(3):423–39. https://​ tion and quality of life in elderly users. Disabil Rehabil doi.​org/​10.​1080/​17450​101.​2021.​18972​36. Vol.: (0123456789) 13 A. B. Diaz et al. 24. Söderberg A, Adell E, Hiselius LW. What is the substitu- 38. Munn Z, Peters MDJ, Stern C, Tufanaru C, McArthur tion effect of e-bikes? A randomised controlled trial. Transp A, Aromataris E. Systematic review or scoping review? Res PART D-TRANSPORT Environ. 2021;90. https://​doi.​ Guidance for authors when choosing between a system- org/​10.​1016/j.​trd.​2020.​102648 atic or scoping review approach Zachary. BMC Med 25. MacArthur J, Harpool M, Scheppke D, et al. A North Res Methodol Published online. 2018. https://​doi.​org/​ American Survey of Electric Bicycle Owners. Published 10.​1186/​s12874-​018-​0611-x. online 2018:67p. http://​ppms.​trec.​pdx.​edu/​media/​proje​ct_​ 39. Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, et al. PRISMA extension for files/​NITC_​RR_​1041_​North_​Ameri​can_​Survey_​Elect​ric_​ scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Bicyc​le_​Owners.​pdf%​0Ahtt​ps://​rosap.​ntl.​bts.​gov/​view/​dot/​ Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467–73. https://​doi.​org/​10.​ 37442%​0Ahtt​ps://​trid.​trb.​org/​view/​15066​00. Accessed 27 7326/​M18-​0850. Oct 2021 40. Nieuwenhuijsen MJ, Khreis H. Transport and health; an 26. Bozzi AD, Aguilera A. Shared e-scooters: a review of uses, introduction. Adv Transp Heal Tools, Technol Policies, Dev. health and environmental impacts, and policy implications of Published online January 2020:3–32. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/​ a new micro-mobility service. Sustain. 2021;13(16). https://​ B978-0-​12-​819136-​1.​00001-2 doi.​org/​10.​3390/​su131​68676 41. Bjørnarå HB, Berntsen S, te Velde SJ, et al. From cars to 27. Glavić D, Trpković A, Milenković M, Jevremović S. The bikes - the feasibility and effect of using e-bikes, longtail e-scooter potential to change urban mobility—belgrade case bikes and traditional bikes for transportation among parents study. Sustain. 2021;13(11). https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​su131​ of children attending kindergarten: design of a randomized 15948 cross-over trial. BMC Public Health. 2017;17(1):9p. https://​ 28. Almannaa MH, Alsahhaf FA, Ashqar HI, Elhenawy M, doi.​org/​10.​1186/​s12889-​017-​4995-z. Masoud M, Rakotonirainy A. Perception analysis of 42. Bourne JE, Sauchelli S, Perry R, et al. Health benefits of e-scooter riders and non-riders in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: electrically-assisHealth benefits of electrically-assisted survey outputs. Sustain. 2021;13(2):1–22. https://​doi.​ cycling: a systematic review. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. org/​10.​3390/​su130​20863. 2018;15(1). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​s12966-​018-​0751-8 29. Bateman LB, Fouad MN, Sullivan A, Heider L, Oates GR. 43. Chapman D, Larsson A. Practical urban planning for winter Barriers and facilitators to bikeshare programs: a qualita- cycling; lessons from a Swedish pilot study. J Transp Heal. tive study in an urban environment. J Transp Heal. 2021;21. 2021;21. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jth.​2021.​101060 https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jth.​2021.​101062 44. De Geus B, Hendriksen I. Cycling for transport, physi- 30. Cao Z, Zhang X, Chua K, Yu H, Zhao J. E-scooter sharing cal activity and health: what about pedelecs? In: Cycling to serve short-distance transit trips: a Singapore case. Transp Futures: From Res Into Practice. 2016:17–31. https://​doi.​org/​ Res PART A-POLICY Pract. 2021;147:177–96. https://​doi.​ 10.​4324/​97813​15575​742-9 org/​10.​1016/j.​tra.​2021.​03.​004. 45. Dill J, Rose G. E-bikes and transportation policy: insights 31. Nikiforiadis A, Paschalidis E, Stamatiadis N, Raptopoulou from early adopters. Transp Res Rec. 2012;2314:1–11. A, Kostareli A, Basbas S. Analysis of attitudes and engage- 46. Johnson M, Rose G. Extending life on the bike: electric bike use ment of shared e-scooter users. Transp Res Part D Transp by older Australians. J Transp Heal. 2015;2(2):276–83. https://​ Environ. 2021;94. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​trd.​2021.​102790 doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jth.​2015.​03.​001. 32. Campbell AA, Cherry CR, Ryerson MS, Yang X. Factors 47. Møller TH, Simlett J. Micromobility: moving cities into a influencing the choice of shared bicycles and shared elec- sustainable future. Ernst & Young Global Limited (UK tric bikes in Beijing. Transp Res Part C Emerg Technol. Company); 2020. https://​assets.​ey.​com/​conte​nt/​dam/​ey‐sites/​ 2016;67:399–414. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/J.​TRC.​2016.​03.​004. eycom/​en_​gl/​topics/​autom​otive​‐and‐trans​porta​tion/​autom​ 33. Bielinski T, Dopierala L, Tarkowski M, Wazna A. Lessons otive​‐trans​porta​tion‐pdfs/​ey‐micro​mobil​ity‐movin​gciti​es‐ from implementing a metropolitan electric bike sharing sys- into‐a‐susta​inabl​e‐future.​pdf. Accessed 27 Oct 2021 tem. Energies. 2020;13(23). https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​en132​ 48. Fearnley N, Berge SH, Johnsson E, et al. Shared e-scooters in 36240 Oslo. TØI Rep. 2020;(1748/2020):116p. https://​www.​toi.​no/​ 34. Wikstrøm RD, Böcker L. Changing suburban daily mobili- getfi​le.​php/​13522​54/​Publi​kasjo​ner/​TØIrapp​orter/​2020/​1748– ties in response to a mobility intervention: a qualitative inves- 2020/​1748–2020-​elekt​ronisk.​pdf. Accessed 21 Oct 2012 tigation of an E-bike trial. Sustain. 2020;12(6). https://​doi.​ 49. Oeschger G, Carroll P, Caulfield B. Micromobility and org/​10.​3390/​su120​62413 public transport integration: the current state of knowledge. 35. Edge S, Dean J, Cuomo M, Keshav S. Exploring e-bikes as Transp Res Part D Transp Environ. 2020;89. https://​doi.​org/​ a mode of sustainable transport: a temporal qualitative study 10.​1016/j.​trd.​2020.​102628 of the perspectives of a sample of novice riders in a Canadian 50. Zagorskas J, Burinskiene M. Challenges caused by increased city. Can Geogr. 2018;62(3):384–97. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​ use of e-powered personal mobility vehicles in European cit- cag.​12456. ies. Sustain. 2020;12(1). https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​su120​10273 36. Bourne JE, Cooper AR, Kelly P, et al. The impact of 51. Arsenio E, Dias J V, Lopes SA, Pereira HI. Assessing the e-cycling on travel behaviour: a scoping review. J Transp market potential of electric bicycles and ICT for low carbon Heal. 2020;19. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jth.​2020.​100910 school travel: a case study in the smart city of Agueda. In: 37. Ognissanto F, Hopkin J, Stevens A, Millard K, Jones M. Coppola P, ed. Emerging technologies and models for trans- Innovative active travel solutions and their evaluation. Pub- port and mobility. Vol 26. Transp Res Procedia. 2017:119– lished.; 2018. https://​trl.​co.​uk/​publi​catio​ns/​an-​evalu​ation-​of-​ 130. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​trpro.​2017.​07.​013 innov​ative-​active-​travel-​solut​ions. Accessed 25 Oct 2021 52. Severengiz S, Schelte N, Bracke S. Analysis of the environmental impact of e-scooter sharing services Vol:. (1234567890) 13 Public Health-Led Insightson Electric Micro-Mobility Adoption and Use considering product reliability characteristics and dura- study. Sustainability. 2021;13(11). https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​ bility. Procedia CIRP. 2020;96:181–8. https://​doi.​org/​10.​ su131​15948 1016/j.​procir.​2021.​01.​072. 66. Campisi T, Akgün-Tanbay N, Md Nahiduzzaman K, Dis- 53. Fyhri A, Heinen E, Fearnley N, Sundfør HB. A push to sanayake D. Uptake of e-scooters in Palermo, Italy: do the cycling—exploring the e-bike’s role in overcoming barriers road users tend to rent, buy or share? Lect Notes Comput Sci to bicycle use with a survey and an intervention study. Int J (including Subser Lect Notes Artif Intell Lect Notes Bioin- Sustain Transp. 2017;11(9):681–95. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​ formatics). 2021;12953 LNCS:669–682. https://​doi.​org/​10.​ 15568​318.​2017.​13025​26. 1007/​978-3-​030-​86976-2_​46 54. Kjærup M, Skov MB, van Berkel N. E-scooter sustain- 67. Weiss M, Dekker P, Moro A, Scholz H, Patel MK. On the elec- ability – a clash of needs, perspectives, and experiences. trification of road transportation - a review of the environmen- Lect Notes Comput Sci (including Subser Lect Notes Artif tal, economic, and social performance of electric two-wheelers. Intell Lect Notes Bioinformatics). 2021;12934 LNCS:365– Transp Res Part D Transp Environ. 2015;41:348–66. https://​doi.​ 383. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​978-3-​030-​85613-7_​26 org/​10.​1016/j.​trd.​2015.​09.​007. 55. Gössling S. Integrating e-scooters in urban transporta- 68. Bielinski T, Wazna A. Electric scooter sharing and bike tion: problems, policies, and the prospect of system sharing user behaviour and characteristics. Sustainability. change. Transp Res Part D Transp Environ. 2020;79(Janu- 2020;12(22). https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​su122​29640 ary):102230. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​trd.​2020.​102230 69. Kwiatkowski MA, Grzelak-Kostulska E, Biegańska J. Could 56. Berntsen S, Malnes L, Langåker A, Bere E. Physical activity it be a bike for everyone? The electric bicycle in Poland. when riding an electric assisted bicycle. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Energies. 2021;14(16). https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​en141​64878 Act. 2017;14(1). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​S12966-​017-​0513-Z 70. Boland P, Connell L, Thetford C, Janssen J. Exploring 57. Glenn J, Bluth M, Christianson M, et al. Considering the the factors influencing the use of electrically assisted bikes potential health impacts of electric scooters: an analysis of (e-bikes) by stroke survivors: a mixed methods multiple case user reported behaviors in Provo, Utah. Int J Environ Res study. Disabil Rehabil Published online. 2020. https://​doi.​ Public Health. 2020;17(17). https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​ijerp​ org/​10.​1080/​09638​288.​2020.​18179​86. h1717​6344 71. Van Cauwenberg J, de Geus B, Deforche B. Cycling for 58. Gojanovic B, Welker J, Iglesias K, Daucourt C, Gremion G. transport among older adults: health benefits, prevalence, Electric bicycles as a new active transportation modality to determinants, injuries and the potential of e-bikes.; 2018. promote health. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011;43(11):2204–10. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​978-3-​319-​76360-6_6 https://​doi.​org/​10.​1249/​MSS.​0b013​e3182​1cbdc8. 72. Yin Y, Yu Z, Wang H, Ye J. Sharing transport in high edu- 59. Dias G, Arsenio E, Ribeiro P. The role of shared e-scooter cation area of Ningbo: examining users’ characteristics and systems in urban sustainability and resilience during the driving determinants. J Clean Prod. 2021;306. https://​doi.​ covid-19 mobility restrictions. Sustain. 2021;13(13). https://​ org/​10.​1016/j.​jclep​ro.​2021.​127231 doi.​org/​10.​3390/​su131​37084 73. Felipe-Falgas P, Madrid-Lopez C, Marquet O. Assess- 60. Alessio HM, Reiman T, Kemper B, von Carlowitz W, ing micromobility environmental performance using Bailer AJ, Timmerman KL. Metabolic and cardiovascular LCA and self-reported modal change. The case of responses to a simulated commute on an e-bike. Transl J Am shared e-bikes, e-scooters, and e-mopeds in Barcelona. Coll Sport Med. 2021;6(2). Sustainability. 2022;14:4139. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​ 61. Teixeira JF, Silva C, e Sá F. The motivations for using bike shar- su140​74139 ing during the COVID-19 pandemic: insights from Lisbon. 74. de Bortoli A. Environmental performance of shared micro- Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav. 2021;82:378–399. mobility and personal alternatives using integrated modal https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​trf.​2021.​09.​016 LCA. Transp Res Part D Transp Environ. 2021;93. https://​ 62. Hoj TH, Bramwell JJ, Lister C, et al. Increasing active trans- doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​trd.​2021.​102743 portation through e-bike use: pilot study comparing the 75. Kroesen M. To what extent do e-bikes substitute travel by health benefits, attitudes, and beliefs surrounding e-bikes and other modes? Evidence from the Netherlands. Transp Res conventional bikes. JMIR Public Heal Surveill. 2018;4(4). Part D Transp Environ. 2017;53:377–87. https://​doi.​org/​10.​ https://​doi.​org/​10.​2196/​10461 1016/j.​trd.​2017.​04.​036. 63. Félix R, Cambra P, Moura F. Build it and give ‘em bikes, 76. Fyhri A, Heinen E, Fearnley N, Sundfor HB. A push to and they will come: the effects of cycling infrastructure and cyclingexploring the e-bike’s role in overcoming barriers bike-sharing system in Lisbon. Case Stud Transp Policy. to bicycle use with a survey and an intervention study. Int J 2020;8(2):672–82. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​cstp.​2020.​03.​002. Sustain Transp. 2017;11(9):681–95. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​ 64. Mildestvedt T, Hovland O, Berntsen S, Bere E, Fegran L. 15568​318.​2017.​13025​26. Getting physically active by e-bike: an active commuting intervention study. Phys Act Heal. 2020;4(1):120–9. https://​ Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard doi.​org/​10.​5334/​paah.​63. to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional 65. Glavic D, Trpkovic A, Milenkovic M, Jevremovic S. The affiliations. e-scooter potential to change urban mobility-Belgrade case Vol.: (0123456789) 13