Travel behaviour research and potential user response Jaroslav Mach City of Prague, Head of Transport Development Unit jaroslav.mach@praha.eu 19 April, 2017 Kick-off meeting, Nikosia
Content 1. Data resources 2. Main travel behaviour data resource 3. Other travel behaviour data resource 2
Travel behaviour Travel behaviour is a result of the decision processes, related predominantly to the choice of: the destination (where we want to get), i.e. the purpose (reason) and the place (location) the means of transport (what we want to use for the journey) traffic route (which route to take) Related aspects price and duration of the transport road chain (means of transport and the route) transported cargo car ownership, journey duration, weather, X Y 3
Main Data Resources Travel behaviour survey TSK hl. m. Prahy Peridocial survey (cca every 5 year) For city of Prague and surrounding Travel behaviour analysis (research) For Prague s mobility plan Analysis of international research General rules Socilological survey For Prague s mobility plan Survey on public attitudes to different mobility tools 4
Other data resourcers Public transport number of users survey about users satisfaction recommendation Paid parking system analysis of changes in parking cars Motorized traffic intensities on main streets automatic maesurement Long term information Bicyclist survey 5
Main Data Resources TRAVEL BEHAVIOUR SURVEY 6
Travel behaviour survey From 1970 s Different methodologies, but overlapping Main information: Where from, where to people travel Why (jobs, education) How namy times a day What transport mode do they use 7
milion cest / den Travel behaviour survey ONLY PRAGUE CITIZENS (2005-2015) 5,0 Progression of the total number of journeys made by Prague citizens 4,255 4,0 3,0 3,318 0,827 3,685 0,926 0,982 1,953 2,0 1,0 0,0 1,672 1,936 0,036 0,011 0,017 1,285 0,808 0,805 2005 2010 2015 pěší + kolo automobilová + hromadná doprava hromadná doprava automobilová doprava total number of performed journeys per Prague citizen is increasing (year 2015 and the effect of methodology) number of journeys in mass transit increased by 17 % over the last 10 years number of journeys by individual automobile traffic - increased by 19 % over the last 10 years 8
Modal split of Prague citizens and visitors in the territory of the Středočeský kraj region Prague citizens automobilová doprava 2015 23% 46% 1% 29% 1% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% hromadná doprava automobilová + hromadná doprava pěší kolo Prague visitors from the Středočeský kraj region citizens (journeys to/from Prague and in Prague) automobile traffic (AT) 2016 45% 36% 8% 11% 0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% public transportatiton (PT) combination of AT and PT walking cycling the modal split has not changed much over the last 10 years in respect of motorized traffic in Prague proportion of the Prague cycling traffic is around 1 % 9
Users of the traffic systems in Prague BALANCE (2007) ubytovaní v bytech Prague (trvale ubytovaní, podnájemníci) citizens 74% One-day visitors 19% jenodenní návštěvníci Short-term visitors 4% hotely, hostely, kempy (přech. krátkodobě) total number of persons present on a normal business day in the city in 2007 was estimated to be ca. 1.8 mil., i.e. ca. 50 % more than the number of Prague citizens each of the groups shows different traffic behaviour penziony, ubytovny, Long-term koleje (přech. dlouhodobě) visitors 3% 10
Main Data Resources TRAVEL BEHAVIOUR ANALYSIS (RESEARCH) 11
Travel behaviour analysis Analysis of scientific knowlegde on topic Charles university in Prague, 2016 What influence users and how General aproaches and rules Main influence Time of travel Cost of travel Individual factors (socio-ekonomic-cultural) 12
Travel behaviour analysis - summary Drivers have a greater resistance to the pricing of specific road sections than others to changes in transport prices, and this regardless of its size. Demand persons dependent on public transport (ie. People younger, older, low-income) is less elastic. Demand for leisure trips is more elastic than the ways to work. Demand for public transport most influenced fare, service quality and prices of parking; Accessibility of public transport leads to its increased use, but may contribute to the spatial expansion of cities. It is estimated that soft motivational tools can lead to an overall reduction of traffic by 2-11%. From soft motivational tools that can be city, has the greatest potential to reduce individual car transport car-sharing support and personalized travel planning. Incentives type of free parking or free access to dedicated lanes increase people's willingness to buy a electric car, their influence, however, is several times smaller than the impact that they have on the decision to purchase an electric potential savings on fuel, other operating costs of the vehicle or lower greenhouse gas emissions. 13
What influence change in modal split Expected change in modal split according to change of Cost of travel Expected change in modal split according to change of Travel time Změny dělby přepr. práce při změně cest. času 5: HD čas +10% 6: HD čas -10% 7: Auto čas -10% 8: Auto čas +10% -3,5% -2,5% -1,5% -0,5% 0,5% 1,5% 2,5% 3,5% kolo spolujízda chůze auto HD Náklady - cost HD public transport Auto individual motorized transport Čas - time Kolo bicycle Chůze walking Spolujízda car pooling 14
Expected change in travel bahaviour In case of change of fuel costs In case of change of personal income 15
Main Data Resources SOCIOLOGICAL SURVEY 16
Sociological survey Part of mobility plan preparation Opinion of public to different tools or approaches in mobility (18) 17
Sociological survey Different type uf users transport mode place of living age reason for travel Important to find out what to communicate to who Main findings Strong influence of current style of mobility Small knowledge of interconnections of tools Small knowledge of new mobility tools 18
Typ podpory scénáře podle typu dopravy Graf zobrazuje podíl podpory scénáře v jednotlivých kategoriích v %. Skór Veřejná doprav a 1x týdně a častěji Několikrát měsíčně Několikrát ročně Nikdy 15 12 8 4 42 45 49 58 30 27 30 20 21 25 8 9 18,32 15,42 12,21 9,14 Osobní auto nebo motorka 1x týdně a častěji Několikrát měsíčně Několikrát ročně Nikdy 8 12 16 24 46 60 60 58 30 18 17 15 16 10 6 3 12,82 16,96 19,53 21,74 Jízdní kolo 1x týdně a častěji Několikrát měsíčně Několikrát ročně Nikdy 25 18 13 12 54 53 50 60 23 24 19 13 8 9 11 11 20,7 18,96 16,48 16,17 Chůze 1x týdně a častěji Několikrát měsíčně Několikrát ročně Nikdy 15 10 11 10 52 49 52 55 20 27 26 22 21 9 11 12 17,56 15,19 14,08 14,79 věrozvěsti podporující neutrální negativní 19
OTHER DATA RESOURCES 20
Quality surveys PIT ONLY PRAGUE CITIZENS (2015) 2009 2011 2013 2015 Average mark (1-6) 2.91 2.64 2.57 2.44 Total contentedness 79 % 87 % 87 % 91 % Average travelling time (min.) 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 39 37 33 35 33 Average number of changes 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 1.79 1.46 1.26 1.47 1.31 21
Motorized traffic intensities 22
Bicyclist survey Why people do not use their bicycles (more) as a transportation means: safety worries when riding worries about their bicycle being stolen better transportation conditions for bicycles in the public transport terrain morphology absence of bike sharing storage for cyclists at their workplace non-systematic (missing systematic connection) of cycling measures (GfK 2012) 23
www.interregeurope.eu/innovasump Thank you!