Choosing Public Transport—Incorporating Richer Behavioural Elements in Modal Choice Models

2013 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 92-106 ◽  
Author(s):  
David A. Hensher ◽  
John M. Rose ◽  
Waiyan Leong ◽  
Alejandro Tirachini ◽  
Zheng Li
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 321
Author(s):  
Alessandro Emilio Capodici ◽  
Gabriele D’Orso ◽  
Marco Migliore

Background: In a world where every municipality is pursuing the goals of more sustainable mobility, bicycles play a fundamental role in getting rid of private cars and travelling by an eco-friendly mode of transport. Additionally, private and shared bikes can be used as a feeder transit system, solving the problem of the first- and last-mile trips. Thanks to GIS (Geographic Information System) software, it is possible to evaluate the effectiveness of such a sustainable means of transport in future users’ modal choice. Methods: Running an accessibility analysis of cycling and rail transport services, the potential mobility demand attracted by these services and the possible multimodality between bicycle and rail transport systems can be assessed. Moreover, thanks to a modal choice model calibrated for high school students, it could be verified if students will be really motivated to adopt this solution for their home-to-school trips. Results: The GIS-based analysis showed that almost half of the active population in the study area might potentially abandon the use of their private car in favour of a bike and its combination with public transport systems; furthermore, the percentage of the students of one high school of Palermo, the Einstein High School, sharply increases from 1.5% up to 10.1%, thanks also to the combination with the rail transport service. Conclusions: The GIS-based methodology shows that multimodal transport can be an effective way to pursue a more sustainable mobility in cities and efficiently connect suburbs with low-frequent public transport services to the main public transport nodes.


2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Danilo Steckelberg ◽  
Guira Barretto ◽  
Nicolás Morales

2004 ◽  
Vol 21 ◽  
pp. 657-665
Author(s):  
Akira ENDO ◽  
Yoshiya NAKAGAWA ◽  
Satoshi OGITA ◽  
Fumihiko NAKAMURA
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lissy La Paix ◽  
Abu Toasin Oakil ◽  
Frank Hofman ◽  
Karst Geurs

AbstractStudies on the impact of changes in travel costs on car and public transport use are typically based on cross-sectional travel survey data or time series analysis and do not capture intrapersonal variation in travel patterns, which can result in biased cost elasticities. This paper examines the influence of panel effects and inertia in travel behaviour on travel cost sensitiveness, based on four waves of the Mobility Panel for the Netherlands (comprising around 90,000 trips). This paper analyses the monetary costs of travel. Panel effects reflect (within wave) intrapersonal variations in mode choice, based on three-day trip diary data available for each wave. The impact of intrapersonal variation on cost sensitiveness is shown by comparing mode choice models with panel effects (mixed logit mode choice models with error components) and without panel effects (multinomial logit models). Inertia represents variability in mode choice between waves, measured as the effect of mode choice decisions made in a previous wave on the decisions made in the current wave. Additionally, all mode choice models include socio-economic and spatial variables but also mode preferences and life events. The effect of inertia on travel cost elasticities is measured by estimating mixed logit mode choice models with and without inertia effects. The main conclusion is that the inclusion of intrapersonal effects tends to increase cost sensitiveness whereas the inclusion of inertia effects decreases travel cost sensitiveness for car and public transport modes. Car users are identified as inert travellers, whereas public transport users show a lower tendency to maintain their usual mode choice. This paper reveals the inertia effects over four waves of repeated respondent’s data repeated yearly.


2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 35
Author(s):  
Wale Alade ◽  
Mobolaji Olaseni ◽  
Olufemi Adeniji

In the past decade-plus there has been a paucity of comparative studies of the performance of public transport options in Lagos. This study evaluates commuters’ access to public transport modes (yellow bus, BRT and ferry), trip characteristics, factors influencing choice of, and the performance of each mode in Lagos to establish improvement priorities. Research data was obtained from 124 commuters through close-ended questionnaire at selected terminals on a major corridor during the morning peak period using incidental sampling technique. The performance of public transport modes was measured using seven variables on a 5-point rating scale. Analysis of variance show significant variation in commuters’ trip cost to terminals. The BRT is the most affordable with respect to fare but has the worst boarding delay occurrence, the ferry is the most efficient with respect to trip time while 45% of yellow bus passengers spend more than one hour per trip. From the linear regression results, delay time at the terminals, travel time and travel cost to destinations accounted for about 55.8% of the total variance in the preferred mode of travel. From the relative performance analysis results, the BRT has the highest mean performance index of 3.72, followed by ferry (3.01) and the yellow bus (2.62). These findings facilitate our understanding of factors influencing the performance and choice of public transport modes in Lagos while providing insights into areas needing attention for improvement. Based on these findings, the study recommended the provision of more BRT buses to reduce the waiting time at terminals, and the review of ferry operations to reduce fare and enhance safety and introduce measures to upscale the services of the for better performance. Future studies should explore commuter waiting and comfort at bus stations and terminals and on-board time use. Keywords: Commuter; Modal Choice; Public Transport; Travel Behaviour; Mobility; Performance


2014 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 221-245 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie Karen Anderson ◽  
Otto Anker Nielsen ◽  
Carlo Giacomo Prato

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document