经济与社会科学2022nature.com
亚特兰大电动滑板车禁令使拥堵增加 10%
Electric scooter ban increased congestion by 10% in Atlanta
入门 · 约 45 分钟读完前置知识：基础统计概念、城市交通规划常识
导读
这篇论文研究了亚特兰大 2019 年禁止共享电动滑板车的影响，发现禁令导致城市交通拥堵增加约 10%，说明滑板车在短途出行中替代了部分汽车出行。研究指出，缺乏替代出行方式时，禁令会带来显著的拥堵成本。
HN 关注点：城市交通政策与共享出行工具的取舍：滑板车虽解决了最后一公里问题，但乱停乱放引发禁令，禁令又造成拥堵，讨论焦点在于监管方式是否比一刀切禁令更合理。
HN 评论精选
这几条评论里：支持 1 补充 2 亲历 1
补充滑板车推行管理失败导致禁令，损害了长期交通改善
我对禁令毫不意外。亚特兰大对电动滑板车的管理简直是场噩梦：滑板车堆满人行道、阻碍行人，100% 的骑行者都在人行道上骑，碰撞事故频发，行人受伤且人心惶惶。可惜事情走到这一步，因为亚特兰大急需替代交通方式。本可以通过严格执法规范停放和骑行来解决，但由于推行方式太糟糕、招人痛恨，最终变成禁令也不奇怪。糟糕的推行方式对改善交通造成了长期损害，如今要推翻因混乱而通过的禁令将是一场硬仗。
AlexB138查看英文原文
I wasn't at all surprised to see the ban. The way electric scooters were handled in Atlanta was an absolute nightmare. They littered every sidewalk, blocking pedestrian traffic in already crowded streets. 100% of people riding them rode them on the sidewalk and collisions were pretty common. People were getting hurt, and were very afraid of getting hit. It's really unfortunate it went this way, because Atlanta badly needs alternative transpiration options. We would likely have been better off with heavy enforcement around proper storage and riding of scooters, but so many people absolutely hated them due to how it was handled that I'm not surprised to see a ban instead. The poor handling of how they were rolled out did a lot of damage long term to fixing transportation. Now there will be an uphill battle against a ban passed in reaction to the mess they created. Disappointing all around.
亲历滑板车实用价值巨大，用户宁愿冒险违规也希望合法化
我继承了给父亲买的电动滑板车（对他来说太老了不适用）。在英国小镇上，它让我几乎不再用车：去超市往返的时间只相当于步行单程，去父母家办事比开车加停车还快。但它是非法的，每次骑出去都有被罚款的风险——不过收益太大，我愿意冒险。我很乐意购买'合法'的滑板车，注册或保险费多少都愿意付。
ljf查看英文原文
Bought an electric scooter for my father (didn't work out at all for him, too old), so I've inherited it. For about town (I live in a small town in the UK) it has meant I barely use the car now. I can get to a supermarket and back again in the time it would take me to walk there, I can get to my parents house and back to do some errand in the time it would take me to drive and park. But it is illegal. Each time I take it out I run the risk of getting a fine - but for now I'll take the risk as the benefit is too great for me. I'd love to buy a 'legal' one and would happily pay whatever registration or insurance was required.
补充共享出行工具需解决高峰期供需错配，否则用户体验崩坏
我记得 Uber 出现前的纽约，抢出租车时只能凶狠地喊'滚开，这是我的车！'。Uber 出现后这种情况基本消失了。然后 CitiBike 来了，骑车出行很棒——直到晚高峰骑车赶火车：只剩 5 分钟赶车，看到一个空还车位，别人也看到了，于是你们冲过去抢，又得喊'滚开，这是我的车位！'。换句话说，城市如果想推广这些出行方式，就必须解决方向性的供需问题，否则人们只会觉得'不值得折腾'。
alexpotato查看英文原文
I remember living in NYC pre-Uber. If you were trying to hail a cab in a spot with other people also trying to get one, you had to resort to aggressively yelling "Back the F@#$ off, that's my cab!" Then Uber came and that largely went away b/c why fight over a cab when you could call and Uber? Then CitiBike came along. It was amazing that you could just get a bike and ride somewhere. That is, until you were riding it to a commuter bus or train station at evening rush hour. Suddenly, you have 5 mins to catch your train and you see one open slot in the bike return. Another person also sees that spot and you race towards it until you ave to say "Back the F@#$ off, that's my spot!" In other words, if cities want to have these options then should address directional supply and demand issues otherwise people are just going to say "Not worth the hassle"
支持应通过停放规则加罚款转嫁来监管，而非一刀切禁令
这就像城市对停车毫无管控，然后不去制定有效的停车执法法规，反而直接禁了汽车。简单的解决方案：1) 城市制定合法停放/骑行准则；2) 对违规行为处以高额罚款；3) 滑板车公司把这些罚款转嫁给违规停放的骑手。但现实却是一堆城市禁掉了这种最便宜、最促进公平、零排放的最后一公里交通方案。
maxcan查看英文原文
Its like cities had zero controls on parking then just banned cars instead of building effective parking enforcement laws. Simple solution: 1) Cities establish guidelines on legal parking / riding. 2) Impose large fines for violations. 3) Scooter companies pass on those fines to the rider who parked illegally. But instead we have a bunch of blue cities banning the most affordable, equity enhancing, zero emissions, last mile transportation solution.
相关资源
从这篇论文所有 HN 讨论帖的全部评论里整理出来的链接。
历次讨论
- 2022Hacker News 讨论帖228 分 · 351 评
同领域还值得读
一切的回报率，1870–2015
The Rate of Return on Everything, 1870–2015
利用1870–2015年多国的长期数据，估算股票、住房等各类资本的回报率，并将其与经济增长率进行比较。
经济与社会科学2019 · 487 分 · 260 评进阶 · 约 100 分钟编辑精选一切资产的回报率，1870–2015
The Rate of Return on Everything, 1870–2015
构建了 1870–2015 年 16 个国家的长周期资产回报数据集，覆盖股票、住房、政府债券和短期票据，系统比较各类资产的真实回报与波动性。
经济与社会科学2018 · 215 分 · 151 评进阶 · 约 120 分钟编辑精选一切资产的回报率，1870–2015（2019）
The Rate of Return on Everything, 1870–2015 (2019)
这篇发表于《经济学季刊》的论文构建了 1870–2015 年间 16 个主要发达国家的股票、债券、房地产等资产收益率的长周期数据库。
经济与社会科学2024 · 190 分 · 148 评进阶 · 约 80 分钟编辑精选想法是否越来越难找？
Are ideas getting harder to find?
探讨“想法是否越来越难找到”：通过衡量多个领域的“研究生产率”，发现维持相同的增长需要投入指数级增长的研究资源，即研究效率在持续下降。
经济与社会科学2016 · 182 分 · 106 评入门 · 约 60 分钟编辑精选比特币与区块链的经济极限
The Economic Limits of Bitcoin and the Blockchain
芝加哥大学 Eric Budish 的论文从经济学角度分析比特币与区块链的根本限制：核心论点是只要攻击网络（双花或砸盘做空）的收益超过挖矿成本，51% 算力攻击就有利可图，而挖矿…
经济与社会科学2018 · 176 分 · 37 评进阶 · 约 90 分钟编辑精选