数字平台环境下低碳出行服务的用户选择行为研究
Research on User Choice Behavior of Low-Carbon Mobility Services in Digital Platform Environments
DOI: 10.12677/ecl.2026.154403, PDF,    科研立项经费支持
作者: 刘 涛, 董洁霜:上海理工大学管理学院,上海
关键词: 电子商务数字平台低碳出行用户选择行为SEM-NL模型E-Commerce Digital Platforms Low-Carbon Mobility User Choice Behavior SEM-NL Model
摘要: 在数字平台深度嵌入出行服务供给的背景下,跨城通勤逐步演化为一种典型的电子商务型服务消费行为。本文以上海及其周边通勤城市为研究对象,基于调研数据构建序贯结构方程–巢式Logit (SEM-NL)两阶段模型,系统分析碳约束条件下数字平台政策工具、心理认知与现实约束对跨城通勤方式选择的影响机制。结果表明,低碳出行意图在用户服务选择中处于核心地位,主要受碳约束感知与平台化政策认知驱动;通勤时间与出行费用仍构成重要现实约束。情景模拟显示,在合理区间内,碳税与平台补贴、信息推送等数字化工具协同实施,可显著提升低碳出行服务的选择比例,并在减排效果与用户接受度之间形成较优平衡。研究揭示了电子商务背景下跨城通勤服务的低碳行为机理,为数字出行平台治理与“双碳”目标下的差异化政策设计提供实证参考。
Abstract: With the deep integration of digital platforms into the provision of mobility services, cross-city commuting has gradually evolved into a typical form of e-commerce-based service consumption. Focusing on Shanghai and its surrounding commuting cities, this study constructs a two-stage Sequential Structural Equation Model-Nested Logit (SEM-NL) framework based on survey data to systematically analyze the mechanisms through which digital platform policy instruments, psychological perceptions, and practical constraints influence users’ mode choice under carbon constraints. The results indicate that low-carbon travel intention plays a central role in users’ service selection, primarily driven by perceptions of carbon constraints and awareness of platform-based policy measures. Meanwhile, commuting time and travel cost remain important practical constraints in decision-making. Scenario simulations further show that, within a reasonable range, the coordinated implementation of carbon taxation and digital platform tools—such as fare subsidies and information nudging—can significantly increase the adoption of low-carbon mobility services, achieving a favorable balance between emission reduction effectiveness and user acceptance. This study reveals the behavioral mechanisms underlying low-carbon mobility service choices in an e-commerce context and provides empirical evidence to support differentiated policy design for digital mobility platform governance in pursuit of carbon neutrality goals.
文章引用:刘涛, 董洁霜. 数字平台环境下低碳出行服务的用户选择行为研究[J]. 电子商务评论, 2026, 15(4): 331-342. https://doi.org/10.12677/ecl.2026.154403

参考文献

[1] 谢琛, 杨良, 李岩. 基于手机信令数据的深莞惠都市圈跨城通勤特征探究[C]//中国城市规划学会城市交通规划学术委员会. 交通治理与空间重塑——2020年中国城市交通规划年会论文集. 深圳: 深圳市城市交通规划设计研究中心股份有限公司, 2020: 1945-1955.
[2] 钮心毅, 王垚, 刘嘉伟, 等. 基于跨城功能联系的上海都市圈空间结构研究[J]. 城市规划学刊, 2018(5): 80-87.
[3] 宋顺锋, 姚敏, 王振坡. 我国城市居民通勤特征与通勤方式选择行为研究——基于天津市的微观调查数据[J]. 城市发展研究, 2018, 25(7): 115-124.
[4] 胡严艺, 蒲政, 王沛. 基于Logit模型的碳排放收费对居民出行方式选择的研究[J]. 交通运输工程与信息学报, 2018, 16(4): 57-62.
[5] 张华歆, 苏逸飞, 智路平. 交通信息下基于出行链的通勤出行方式选择行为[J]. 上海海事大学学报, 2016, 37(1): 49-54, 64.
[6] Espino, R., Román, C. and De Ortúzar, J.D. (2006) Analysing Demand for Suburban Trips: A Mixed RP/SP Model with Latent Variables and Interaction Effects. Transportation, 33, 241-261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[7] Meena, S., Patil, G.R. and Mondal, A. (2019) Understanding Mode Choice Decisions for Shopping Mall Trips in Metro Cities of Developing Countries. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 64, 133-146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[8] 王殿海, 李逸文, 蔡正义. 收费及奖励策略对通勤出行方式选择的影响分析[J]. 交通运输系统工程与信息, 2024, 24(2): 1-12.
[9] 惠晨曦, 朱从坤. 基于演化博弈的城市公共交通出行激励机制研究[J]. 物流科技, 2024, 47(14): 47-51.
[10] Tian, Y., Li, Y. and Sun, J. (2022) Stick or Carrot for Traffic Demand Management? Evidence from Experimental Economics. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 160, 235-254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[11] Kumar, V., Bhat, C.R., Pendyala, R.M., et al. (2016) Impacts of Incentive-Based Intervention on Peak Period Traffic: Experience from the Netherlands. Transportation Research Record, 2543, 166-175.
[12] 吴文静, 熊康贝, 杨丽丽, 等. 基于心理账户的客运走廊公交换乘优惠策略[J]. 吉林大学学报(工学版), 2023, 53(11): 3113-3121.
[13] 李亚平, 孙帅. 奖励策略对大学生交通方式选择行为的影响[J]. 交通科技与管理, 2023, 4(24): 182-184, 161.
[14] Hair Jr, J.F., Sarstedt, M., Hopkins, L. and Kuppelwieser, V.G. (2014) Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM): An Emerging Tool in Business Research. European Business Review, 26, 106-121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef