Reasons for participating in formal employer-led carpool schemes as perceived by their users

What determines carpooling to workplaces in Belgium: location, organisation, or promotion?

“…In what follows, we put the effectiveness of measures into perspective. As Canning et al (2010) point out, the success of preferential parking depends on the actual parking pressure at a site. Regarding work schedules, most studies state that a regular work schedule facilitates finding carpool-partners with the same working hours and that flexible work schedules positively influence public transport patronage.…”

“…Privacy issues and the fear to ride with strangers thus limit the potential of carpooling, although a minority positively values the 'more sociable travel'. However, financial motives and environmental concern are considered more important attitudinal factors than the social aspect (Canning et al, 2010).…”

“…However, although a flexible work arrangement reduces the probability that carpooling enters the choice set of a commuter, once the commuter perceives carpooling as a viable option, there is a positive effect of flexitime on carpooling (Habib et al, 2011). Obviously, the development of ICT brings along more advanced (on-line) carpool-matching tools (Buliung et al, 2010;Canning et al, 2010). Some of these tools try to overcome the poor schedule flexibility and offer a dynamic ride-matching service.…”

“…Most studies do not detect strong correlations between socio-demographics and carpooling propensity (Buliung et al, 2010;Canning et al, 2010;Ferguson, 1997a;Teal, 1987).…”

“…In contrast to studies like Habib et al (2011) and Canning et al (2010), which analysed respectively one and six employer-led carpooling schemes with more detail, we employ a large dataset containing several thousands of workplaces. Although our main focus is on workplaces, a multilevel perspective is used (Wegener, 2011).…”