Calibration of a Public Transport Performance Measurement System for Switzerland

Orth, Hermann; Carrasco, Nelson; Schwertner, Michael; Weidmann, Ulrich

doi:10.3141/2351-12

Cited by 8 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Not shown in Table 1 are reliability levels; however, studies in Zurich have shown that despite dense traffic, the existing prioritization has secured a relatively high level of reliability (11); this is another key element needed to make a system without a grade-separated midtier work.…”

Section: Public Transport Network Levelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Level-Based Approach to Public Transport Network Planning

Orth

Nash²,

Weidmann

2015

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation R

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The public transport network level is defined and is used to describe the performance and future improvement of the public transport system in Zurich, Switzerland. A public transport level is a specific type of service designed to serve a particular market. “Service” is defined as a combination of vehicles, infrastructure, and operating characteristics. A pure level occurs when the service is targeted specifically at one particular market. A hybrid level occurs when a service is targeted to serve several markets. Urban travel is generally described as three markets: short, inter mediate, and long-distance trips. Consequently many cities have developed three-level public transport networks: surface buses and trams to serve short trips, rapid rail to serve intermediate trips, and regional rail to serve longer-distance trips. Often, by design or for historic reasons, cities have additional levels, fewer levels, levels that are not precisely matched to their markets, or all three. For example, two-level networks are often found in medium-sized cities. Their advantage is lower costs, and their main disadvantage is a mismatch between transport mode and market that manifests itself in capacity limitations. The level concept to help analyze and plan public transport service is useful because it focuses attention on matching service qualities to markets. This approach, used here to analyze the success of the public transport system of Zurich, Switzerland, and to provide a structure for planning improvements that will be needed to meet rapidly increasing public transport demand, could help other cities design or redesign their public transport systems to be more attractive and efficient. More specifically, the approach could show how two-level public transport networks would be a viable option for medium-sized cities and large cities with dispersed settlement patterns.

show abstract

Section: Public Transport Network Levelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Zurich's public transport system is easy to use, very accessible, and generally still provides high-quality service [see, e.g., work by Orth et al (11)]. However, increasing demand is reducing service quality on both the surface-based and S-Bahn network levels.…”

Section: Performance Of Zurich's Two-level Public Transport Networkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Level-Based Approach to Public Transport Network Planning

Orth

Nash²,

Weidmann

2015

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation R

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The set of indicators for PT System are determined accordingly to the specific studies and research works and various literature examples can be provided (Brons et al, 2005;Henk and Hubbard, 1996;Lee, 1989;Nakanishi, 1997;Orth et al, 2013;TRB, 2003).…”

Section: Indicators Of Objective Aspects -Delivered Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Key quality factors and travellers profiles at interurban interchanges

Asin¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quality of Service can not be neglected in public transport planning and policy making, since it strongly influences modal shifts from car to more sustainable modes. This concept is also related to Public Transport interchanges, the nodes of the transport system where the different sub-systems of public passenger transport and personal vehicles meet. Although a lot of progress has been generally done to measure and assess quality in public transport sector, relatively little investigation has been conducted on quality at PT interchanges. This research work focusses on Quality of Service in the use of transfer facilities at interurban interchanges, according to current travellers' perspective. It aims at identifying key quality factors and travellers profiles at interurban interchanges. The research is exploratory and offers insight into intermodal travellers' perception on quality aspects, providing new elements and inputs for more definitive investigation.The methodology of the work combines multivariate statistical techniques to analyse data from customer satisfaction surveys and is subdivided in three steps. Firstly, multiple correspondence analysis was performed to explore latent constructs as concern satisfaction of quality attributes at interurban interchanges, thus identifying the so-called Key Quality Factor. Secondly, k-means cluster analysis was implemented on the key quality factors to classify travellers in homogeneous groups of transport users, according to their perception of satisfaction, thus identifying the so-called Travellers Profiles. Finally, hints and recommendations on quality were identified to support policy making, setting priorities for interurban interchanges.The methodology was applied at four interurban interchanges in Madrid, Zaragoza, Gothenburg and Lyon, analysing the data collected through a customer satisfaction survey carried out in 2011 at the four railway or bus stations where different modes of public and private transport are interconnected covering both short and long trips. Data on travellers' satisfaction with 26 quality attributes were collected, as well as information on socio-economical and travel patterns.Through multiple correspondence analysis were identified 4-5 key quality factors per interchange.They are mainly related to ticketing, comfort and connectivity, while classical issues, as information, are not perceived as important by travellers'. Through cluster analysis were identified 2-5 travellers profiles per interchange. Two groups of travellers can be found in almost all case studies: commuter / business travellers and holiday travellers. As regards the priorities to support stakeholders in policy making, ticketing is the key-issue for the Spanish interurban interchanges, while connectivity and temporal issues emerge in the French and Swedish case studies.

show abstract