Ridesourcing in Rural Communities, North Dakota Driver Survey

Vachal, Kimberly · 2021 · ROSA P / Mountain-Plains Consortium

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (full text — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This study investigates the potential for ridesourcing services, such as Uber and Lyft, to succeed in rural North Dakota, focusing on rider demand, public perception, and accessibility. While ridesourcing has revolutionized urban transportation, its expansion into rural markets faces challenges due to low population density and limited infrastructure. The research aims to understand factors facilitating or inhibiting growth, particularly regarding older adults and alcohol-impaired driving alternatives, to determine if these services can provide stable market mechanisms in rural communities. The researchers conducted a mail survey of licensed drivers in North Dakota, combining data from two phases: a 2020 survey of drivers aged 35 and older and a 2021 survey of drivers aged 18–34. The study utilized a disproportionate stratified random sample across four geographic quadrants (east/west and urban/rural) to ensure sufficient responses across strata. A total of 1,026 valid responses were collected and post-stratified to represent the statewide adult driver population. The survey assessed familiarity, usage frequency, trip purposes, service availability, and perceptions of ridesourcing, with specific attention to incentives and technology access. Results indicate that while 71.5% of respondents were familiar with ridesourcing, this rate was significantly lower than the national average. Familiarity declined sharply with age, with nearly 90% of drivers under 55 familiar with the services compared to only 24% of those aged 75 and older. Service availability was heavily skewed toward urban areas, with 85.1% of urban residents reporting access versus only 5.9% of rural residents. Smartphone ownership, essential for using these apps, was reported by 87.3% of respondents but was notably lower among older cohorts. Despite limited usage, 83.9% of respondents viewed ridesourcing as a good alternative to driving after drinking, and 56.2% saw it as beneficial for older adult mobility. Interest in using ridesourcing increased significantly when discounts or vouchers were offered, particularly among non-users and younger drivers. Airport transfers and social trips were the most common purposes, while healthcare and work trips saw lower interest, though older adults showed higher willingness for healthcare-related rides. The findings suggest that while public perception of ridesourcing as a safety tool for impaired driving and older adult mobility is positive, significant barriers remain in rural North Dakota. These include limited service availability, technological hurdles related to smartphone ownership and cellular coverage, and low familiarity among older demographics. The study concludes that public education and targeted incentive programs are necessary to expand market accessibility and stability. Improving these factors could support the viability of ridesourcing in rural areas, offering critical transportation alternatives and enhancing traffic safety.

Key finding

Ridesourcing was viewed as a safe alternative to driving after drinking by 83.9% of respondents and as a good mobility option for older adults by 56.2%, despite limited rural service availability and lower familiarity rates compared to national averages.

Methodology

survey

Sample size: 1026

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed. Discovered via bulk_ingest_rosap on 2026-05-23 (6 acquisition events logged).

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-10; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• exposure measurement

Information type

What kind of knowledge this paper contributes, grouped by family — independent of topic (what it is about) and method (how it was studied).

• Empirical Findings: observational prevalence