From the analyzes carried out, we identified the trade-off of value perceived by users of BSS existing in the Metropolitan Region of Recife, Brazil. In this section, we divide these findings into benefits and sacrifices of using this system.
4.1 Benefits
The informants' experience encompasses an access experience (Bardhi and Eckhardt 2012) that highlights the possibility of enjoying a good without having to own it. This is a practice of circularity (Moro et al. 2022; Botsman and Rogers 2011) appreciated by Bike PE users, understood as a benefit that the BSS offers:
I think what's good about this project is the part of being able to have a way, for those who don't have a bicycle, to use it, gather friends and go out (Interview 5 – leisure).
It is worth it. It's worth it, because I do my pedaling without major worries. I go to a destination, stop, give it some time and it's there, it's delivered. When I need to pick it up again and that's it, I'm not that careful, you know, I don't have to watch if everyone is going to steal, if not, I delivered the bike, put it at the station, for me it's worth it (Interview 10 - leisure / exercise).
It certainly is very valid. It is always valid for a company to offer the user a shared use, this also, I think, stimulates collective awareness. [...] you don't have to have that good in your house, you don't have to maintain that good, there are people who don't even have a place to put their bicycle, they live in a small apartment, they don't want to spend money on chains, etc. (Interview 18 – locomotion/ exercise).
The usability of the product, therefore, is an advantage perceived by users of the system who cannot or do not want to buy a bicycle. Being described as the main benefit of the SCB by the informants, the access to the modal is representative of the sharing of use, reducing the need for ownership (Stephany 2015; Vélez 2023). As motivators for this perception, we identified the lack of space in the houses to allocate the bicycle, as well as the consumer's lack of concern with the maintenance of the good (informant 18) and its breakdowns or risk of theft (informant 10). In fact, access rather than ownership can bring greater convenience to consumers (Leismann et al. 2013), so that they do not have to bear the long-term responsibilities that ownership entails (DeMaio and Gifford 2004) offering continuous access without the burden of ownership (Shaheen and Chan 2016; Rechene and Silva 2020; Vélez 2023). Indeed, PSS practices are based on the understanding that a large part of the responsibility rests with the provider (Mont 1998; Stahel 2019) who has the duty to offer an object with conditions of use. Informant 2 reinforces this perception:
For me today, it's easier to use Bike PE, because I don't have a place to store a bike, do maintenance on it. For me, Bike PE is more convenient [...], it's less responsibility. It's something I don't have and it's available to anyone and I can use it even though it's not mine (Interview 2 - leisure/ exercise).
Access to the BSS is also based on the notion of financial cost. Usually associated with the notion of sacrifice in value trade-off models (Zeithaml 1998; Permarupan et al. 2014), in collaborative practices, this element is representative of its advantage, being perceived as a benefit (Moro et al. 2022; Imhof 2018; Halvadia et al. 2022). This occurs because the rate of bicycle use is understood as accessible, economically attractive (Zhang et al. 2015), according to the informants' reports:
And that's exactly the financial thing. Like this? What I would spend on transportation per day on the bus, I already save BRL 2,00, it is already an economy in using the Bike PE (Interview 15 - locomotion/ exercise).
There is a Bike PE station at UPE, so I take it and come here, it doesn't take me twenty minutes. There is a station there, so I save bus fare. I spent what, three tickets a day, nowadays I only spend two. It's too little? Yeah, but it's savings in a month, it's quite a big savings. Besides, I've already adapted, every time I leave work, I go straight to it (Informant 17 - locomotion/ exercise).
The financial aspect is, therefore, an element that encourages bike sharing, in addition to convenience. The lower cost stands out, especially in the user profile that uses the Bike PE for locomotion purposes, as they generally replace the bus and its more expensive ticket for the bicycle.
Through access that allows the use of bicycles, research informants described the following benefits: the possibility of escaping city traffic, generating socialization, improving health and promoting less environmental degradation through conscious consumption behaviors. Such benefits are reflections of the use of a modal that enhances sustainable behaviors (Zhang et al. 2015). That is, such advantages described are not linked to the BSS itself, but the bicycle itself, which, in this case, is the result of the offer of a Product Service System (PSS). Initially, the bicycle was described as a modal that makes it possible to deviate from heavy traffic, take alternative routes and reduce the stress generated by the delay in reaching destinations.
It's good to use it to escape traffic. I couldn't take it anymore. I live 15 minutes from work and it took an hour and 10 to get there. Then I was feeling like an idiot [laughs] (Interview 6 – locomotion).
Sometimes I say “I'm missing a thrill ride. So, let's go to old Recife, let's take a different route than you usually do” [...]. A bicycle for me is not a means of transportation, it is an experience (Interview 7 - leisure).
The bicycle, therefore, is a form of transport that offers flexibility and adaptability, as well as reducing travel time in cities with high levels of congestion, helping to reduce stress and fatigue resulting from traffic jams (Nieuwenhuijsen 2020; Alonso-Mora et al. 2017; Violin 2021). In this sense, the use of the bicycle is reinforced as a contributor to public health (Zhang and Li 2023) and less environmental impact, that is, it is an object whose use helps to preserve the environment and maintain the individual's health.
I think the main thing at the time was the question of health itself, it was the question of taking care of my body. In the beginning, I cycled for half an hour every day, it could be at night, it could be in the morning, whatever time I had from university, I spent half an hour pedaling, for health reasons (Interview 3, Locomotion/Leisure/Exercise).
It's worth it, it's really worth it because in my case I use it for getting around and for physical exercise, to bring a better quality of life... Many times, I leave at the last minute, I take the bike and in two minutes I arrive somewhere that I wanted[...] it reduces the impact on the environment, CO2 emissions, these gases and even traffic too, it reduces traffic (Interview 11, Locomotion/ Exercise).
[Bike PE] is something innovative, something that can change the quality of life a lot, not only with regard to mobility, but also with regard to the health of the population. We talk so much about sustainability, talk so much about change, but sometimes we end up going to the market and buying a product that is not recyclable and does not make a difference in everyday life. Encouraging the non-use of cars, I think there is a lot to expand, so that everyone can have access (Interview 20, Locomotion).
Especially for those consumers who use the bicycle for leisure, pedaling is a hedonic action, generating pleasure and social inclusion, connection with others and the city:
People are very sociable. I don't know if it's because they're in a leisure area or because they're sharing something, they already have one thing in common, which is sharing a bicycle. I know it's like this, for example, when I have a problem, in an instant for a person to say “ah, how is your bike?” (Interview 1 - leisure/ exercise).
[With the bicycle] I participated in my city, I got to know streets I didn't know, I met people I didn't know. So today I live with a bicycle, I see the bicycle as a part of myself (Interview 4 - leisure).
When I got on the Bike PE bike and went to old Recife and started to live more in the city, it was incredible. The bicycle is something that brings you very close to the urban center, the city, other cyclists (Interview 7 - leisure).
It was thus perceived that the bicycle is a tool for social inclusion (Miñano and Santos 2015), providing pleasant experiences, allowing one to get to know the city, establish emotional bonds with the space and with the other, acting on the identity of the interviewees. We recognize, therefore, that the BSS can help improve the quality of life and reduce urban pollution, promoted in a financially accessible way, encompassing the three dimensions of sustainability: environmental, social and economic; finding that corroborates with some studies (Li et al. 2020; Moro and Amorim 2019; Imhof 2018). Also noteworthy is the cultural dimension presented by informants who use the System for leisure, as they re-signify the city in which they travel, offering local experiences with what the space offers.
Thus, we recognize the main benefit offered by BSS, the motivations that justify such a benefit, and the secondary benefits arising from the use of the bicycle itself. We move on to the sacrifices involved in accessing/using this type of Product Service System.
4.2 Sacrifices
Throughout the observation technique, we visualized some problems faced by Bike PE users; highlighting the difficulties in removing bicycles, due to problems in the system that manages access. The research informants corroborated this assertion, describing, throughout the interviews, several flaws in Bike PE's ICT. In Fig. 6, we present the details of these failures perceived and experienced by BSS users under study.
BSSs are mediated by ICT that must ensure the continuous operation of the service (Shaheen and Chan 2016; Rechene and Silva 2020; Vélez 2023). We recognize, however, that such technologies in Bike PE need to be optimized, due to the flaws mentioned in Fig. 6 that compromise access to the bicycle, generating costs and risks perceived by the consumer arising from technical problems presented in BSS (Akbar and Hoffmann 2018). We highlight, in this process, the emotional costs, time, physical energy and extra monetary costs.
Emotional costs are the result of feelings of fear, stress and anger (Beldona and Kher 2014) caused by the unavailability of cycling, negatively impacting the perception of the SCB. That is, this cost is associated with not using the desired service or even with the use that generated greater efforts from the consumer, such as having to walk to another platform, because the communication between the application and the platform closest to the user was having problems.
It is important to point out that emotional costs result from other costs perceived by consumers through failures in the system. For example, extra costs related to physical efforts are incurred when users are unable to access the system on the desired platform, leading them to look for other platforms or available bicycles, or even giving up use, walking to the destination or even a nearest bus stop. In the latter case, there is an extra monetary cost that was not planned by the consumer as a result. As described by informant 16 (Fig. 6), there is also a time cost involved in the access that experiences a failure. Users wait for the system to return, for the reestablishment of communication between technology-platform-item and for an update of the situation of spaces and bicycles available on each platform. Such costs are conditional on functional risk, that is, they contribute to the consumer's perception that the service will not work as expected (Ravald and Grönroos 1996; Williams 2016).
Another problem faced by informants, especially those who use them for transportation purposes, is the lack of items. There is a lack of enough stations or even available spaces for picking up or returning the bicycle in them, resulting in delays in appointments and day-to-day activities.
Another problem is when the stations are full, then you have to go look for another station to return the bike, right (And that doesn't slow you down?). Well, sometimes we are short notice, have an appointment, a class that ends up being late, waste time and arrive late. They should inspect more carefully, more often (Interview 11 - locomotion/ exercise).
The lack of stock of the item is described as an emotional cost that entails the perception of functional risk (Akbar and Hoffmann 2018). In this research, however, we recognize insufficiency as a state that will also result in time and research costs. The first occurs because the insufficiency will require the user an extra period to find an available bicycle or a platform to return the item; the second cost imposes on the consumer a search in the application in order to find information about availability and distance, helping in decision-making due to the problem experienced. Consistent with the authors (Akbar and Hoffmann 2018), the functional risk that compromises the access experience is perceived, by impacting the perception of stations as spaces available for the collection and return of used bicycles at any time (Rechene and Silva 2020).
Informants still have to deal with problems with the bikes and the stations themselves. Defects in the saddle, tires, gear, brake, chain and mirror are the elements mentioned by them, in addition to the platforms being discovered, which intensifies equipment wear due to climate issues. Along with this problem, there is a lack of maintenance.
Bike PE's service is terrible. In relation, first to some bicycles, like the flat tire, without the mirror, the mirror torn off, the gears out of order, the seat has already happened when I adjust it and I walk and it goes down, there are a series of problems with the bicycle and also in the Bike PE system, I was afraid of getting hurt (Interview 4 - leisure).
Sometimes the cell keeps lowering all the time, the brake doesn't work. And also, one of the problems that I forgot to mention is the maintenance that is not always present. I always find a broken bicycle due to misuse (Interview 14 - leisure/ exercise).
In addition to the functional risk incurred, the problem described by informants 4 and 14 reveals a physical risk. Damaged bicycles can compromise the safety of users and others involved in the bicycle circulation space. Contributing to the perception of physical risk, informants add concerns about the lack of infrastructure in cities where Bike PE is present. For example, during the weekends, the city of Recife implements cycle tracks in a good part of the city, but during the week, what prevails is their absence.
The disadvantages are those I told you about, the problems with the system and also the fact that there are no cycle tracks here. I only feel safe when there's a cycle tracks, so I ride on Sundays when there's a cycle track or when it's a holiday. If it's without a bike lane, I won't risk it (Interview 2 - leisure/ exercise).
Although it requires less infrastructure when compared to motor vehicles (DeMaio and Gifford 2004), BSS will be duly effective in cities that offer bike lanes and guarantee the confidence of individuals in using bikes, reducing the perception of risk physicist. Encouraging the practice of cycling on weekends with the implementation of cycle tracks is an initial movement that encourages the use of bicycles as a leisure tool. It is necessary, however, to expand its use options, offering a network of cycle tracks that guarantee the continuous use of this modal, based on the establishment of solutions by social actors and public authorities (Zhang and Li 2023).