Why do companies’ institutional strategies differ across cities? A cross-case analysis of bike sharing in Shanghai & Amsterdam

Publication date

2020

Authors

van Waes, A.H.M.ISNI 0000000443824472
Farla, JaccoISNI 0000000389549237
Raven, R.P.J.M.ORCID 0000-0002-6330-0831ISNI 0000000352065271

Editors

Advisors

Supervisors

Document Type

Article
Open Access logo

License

cc_by

Abstract

Bike sharing has the potential to contribute to more sustainable urban mobility. Companies providing this service need to generate legitimacy for their venture when entering new cities. They may have to change formal and informal institutions in cities they want to operate. In this paper we explore how and why companies’ institutional strategies differ across cities. We compare strategies of emerging free-floating bike sharing companies in Shanghai and Amsterdam. These cities provide a counterintuitive starting point: Shanghai is a car-dominant city which has embraced bike sharing, whereas in Amsterdam – a typical cycling city – it was banned soon after its introduction. We find that companies use similar launching strategies, but different institutional strategies as they respond to varying spatial conditions consisting of local institutions (e.g. rules, norms and cultures) physical place specific elements (e.g. infrastructures and urban mobility challenges) and issues of power (e.g. support and resistance).

Keywords

Bike sharing, Business strategy, Institutional work, Micromobility, Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment, Environmental Science (miscellaneous), Social Sciences (miscellaneous), SDG 9 - Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure, SDG 11 - Sustainable Cities and Communities

Citation

van Waes, A, Farla, J & Raven, R 2020, 'Why do companies’ institutional strategies differ across cities? A cross-case analysis of bike sharing in Shanghai & Amsterdam', Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, vol. 36, pp. 151-163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2020.06.002