8 Conclusions and discussion
8.4 Conclusions
In concluding this chapter and dissertation, it is in order to consider some of the modern-day
‘realities’ that transport planners face and which will undoubtedly infl uence any attempts to promote public transport as a sustainable and suitable transport mode. ese realities relate to those factors that infl uence the matching of individual transport demand with the supply of public transport.
As the dissertation aimed to illustrate, public transport is undoubtedly complex and its structure obviously infl uences activity-travel behaviour. e complexity facing users of the system is appropriately captured by the popular Dutch saying: ‘Ze pikken je op waar je niet bent, en brengen je waar je niet wezen wil op een tijd die je niet past’ translated, ‘She (public transport) She (public transport) She ( picks you up where you are not, takes you where you do not want to be at a time that does not suit you’. In a sense, this saying captures all the decisions faced by public transport travellers and the spatial and temporal constraints imposed on them. ese ‘weaknesses’ of public transport are exactly the ‘strengths’ of the car. In short, the car is (almost) always available and can reach (almost) all locations, thus presenting signifi cant spatial and temporal benefi ts to the user. As a result of many spatial and economic trends impacting on society, the temporal and spatial demand for travel has been fractionalised into many diverse, segmented and individualised travel needs. e car has responded to these changes by providing a cheap, fl exible and much personalised transport form enabling individuals to implement their increasingly diverse activity requirements. Planning for the car involves providing a connected (hierarchical) road network and parking facilities, with most responsibility relegated to the private sector. Contrarily, public transport has been much less responsive to accommodate these trends and, as Dijst (, p.
) appropriately notes, ‘how much more diffi cult is it not to plan for public transport’ (Dijst, ). how much more diffi cult is it not to plan for public transport’ (Dijst, ). how much more diffi cult is it not to plan for public transport Public transport planning involves providing a network, schedule, rolling stock, and a fare structure. Most of these tasks are the responsibility of a public transport authority. e result is the inevitable mismatch between the demand for and supply of public transport services.
Related to the many decisions facing public travellers is the issue of reliability. It is a simple statistical ‘theorem’ which states that the more elements in a chain, the higher the probability of a ‘break’ in the chain. A public transport trip always consists of a minimum of three (movement) stages and, assuming the probability of completing one stage successfully is (which is associated with the car), the probability of completing three public transport stages successfully is ! Clearly, the reliability of multimodal, multistage public transport becomes a major issue.
Faced with an increasingly time-constrained, individualised society that demands (and indeed is willing to pay) for good, reliable service, it becomes a question of whether multimodal, multistage public transport can face up to these travel demands. Public transport serves a collective market very well (limited origins and destinations on a limited number of routes for collective market very well (limited origins and destinations on a limited number of routes for collective market
the average traveller). e problem, however, is that today’s market-segmented, market-oriented decentralised society does not demand transport, but interaction, with the transport mode being a secondary, lifestyle decision. e private car is very successful in addressing these mandatory interaction and ultimately lifestyle requirements. In short, public transport is in the transport business while the car is (increasingly so) in the lifestyle business.
In an article in the Dutch daily newspaper, Algemene Dagblad, Cees Wildervanck () notes, rather appropriately, that travel behaviour is very much routine behaviour (routine behaviour (routine behaviour ‘vervoersgedrag is gewoontegedrag’) (Wildervanck, ). No individual makes daily decisions such as ‘
gewoontegedrag’) (Wildervanck, ). No individual makes daily decisions such as ‘
gewoontegedrag’ what mode
should I use, what time should I leave for work, what route should I take’. All these decisions are habitual, made in a very distant past (actually a day before the fi rst trip was made). A typical morning commuter is much more likely to be making a statement like ‘... if government improves public transport, all these irrational commuters will take the train which will make my car journey much faster ...’ ( e Onion, ). If this is true (and all arguments point to this), then the question that should be asked is, what benefi t does it hold to change behaviour once users have settled into their daily routine, or even worse (from a transport planner’s perspective), if they have settled into their lifestyle decision? As Chapter revealed, activity behaviour precedes mode choice and, as discussed, the implications for transport policy are signifi cant. Building new residential areas (such as the Leidsche Rijn outside Utrecht, e Netherlands), contributes little to reducing unsustainable travel behaviour patterns or increasing public transport use if the new inhabitants are not, from the outset, provided with a high-quality public transport system that makes them think about those fi rst sets of travel decisions, i.e. what mode, when to leave, etc. Even worse, moving households to new residential developments without a high-quality public transport system will make one-car ownership households into double-car ownership households (especially if they are provided with ample residential parking)!
Somewhat ironically, young couples (with/without children) are often a group targeted by spatial planning policies, such as the development of the new towns. is group, in particular, is also the one group who has seen a decrease in their free time which, partly, is an outcome of the emancipation trend and the continuing entry of women into the full- and part-time labour force. ey have to combine child-caring responsibilities with employment, which puts a lot of pressure on their free time. Clearly this group will demand much spatial and temporal fl exibility from their transport mode to cope with their time-constrained lifestyle choices ( eeuwes, ). Faced with a time-constrained lifestyle and a limited transport choice set
(as defi ned by inadequate public transport proximity, connectivity and interconnectivity), this will simply increase the benefi t of the car. Not only does this infl uence the immediate travel behaviour patterns of the households, it also has longer-term repercussions. at is, younger cohorts are growing up with this travel experience and are much more likely to obtain a driver’s license. is suggests that over time an increasingly larger share of the population will own cars and the demand for public transport will continue to decline (Feitelson, ).
Promoting public transport as a sustainable substitute too often relies on the assumption that travellers make rational choices. While this may in part be true, arguably, the choice in favour of rational choices. While this may in part be true, arguably, the choice in favour of rational using the car as a personal good has never been an entirely rational choice. In fact, this choice also contains irrational choice elements based on, for example, subjective feelings of control over the environment (listening to the radio in the car, cleanliness, when to leave, what to take along when travelling, etc.). e choice of public transport is a more rational choice based on the price of the ticket, travel-time, access and egress and number of transfers, etc.(Wildervanck, ) If this is the case, much benefi t can be obtained by, in addition to focusing on revealed behaviour, also focusing on preference information (i.e. stated preference type data). Market researchers and retailers have long since recognised the need and benefi t of collecting data on preferences for their products and market strategies. Maybe transport planners need to follow suit as they consider a more market-oriented approach to public transport planning.
In the fi nal instance, mention should be made of the trend in public transport privatisation. e trend towards privatisation and adopting market principles will have an impact on the supply of public transport services. Currently there is much pressure on the Dutch public transport system (and generally all public transport authorities) to cut unprofi table routes and focus on providing a better service for profi table routes (van Gelder, ). Arguably, if public transport authorities are left to their own devices, they will focus exclusively on the more profi table (read interurban work/education) routes, thus serving the needs of full-time employment professionals and (partly) the needs of semi-captive travellers. Serving the needs of captive users becomes less of a priority and often policies to serve the diff erent public transport users, e.g. captives, non-captives, profi table and non-profi table routes, are confl icting. Whether or not the government should play a more active role in public transport supply was not addressed in this dissertation. Rather, the only objective has been to state that public transport supply under profi t principles and managed by independent public transport operators may look very diff erent than the current public transport supply. Increased fees, limited route coverage, selective market targeting, etc. will have a signifi cant impact on activity-travel choices and the potential of public transport as a suitable transport mode.
As the above illustrates, there are many realities facing public transport planners and policymakers. In addition to searching for rational solutions, the only thing transport planners and policymakers can do is to improve their understanding of activity-travel behaviour and the factors that infl uence these choices. is will ultimately aid them in developing improved transport models. Model building (including activity-based models) is very much a heuristic process and researchers and policymakers rarely know either the fi nal form of variables and parameters in advance or the outcome of policy. Only afterwards is it possible to identify shortcomings and opportunities for improvement and evaluate the outcome. is research has hopefully provided more insight into public transport travel behaviour and demonstrated how
activity-travel models can be improved by specifying more complex models and by collecting more detailed and comprehensive data.