Users of Transport Modes and Multimodal Travel Behavior

Abstract

Results are presented from analysis of individual mode choice behavior in the longitudinal section in Germany. The findings show that about half of German drivers also use public transport. Because they use different modes, they can be characterized as multimodals. This group will constitute an increasing share of the public transport clientele in coming decades because the decline of captive public transport riders is foreseeable. Therefore it is necessary to understand multimodal behavior because in an environment where travelers have increasing options, it is important to know how they make use of their options. It was found that multimodals employ public transport for specific purposes, whereas the car is universal. Less than 20% of multimodals use public transport on a regular basis, for example, to commute. Most multimodals use it occasionally. Multimodals opt for public transport in specific situations because it is the better option and not because there is no car available. Although for families the car is often the better choice, single persons tend to be more multimodal. Commuting by public transport was found to be a gateway to the use of public transport for other purposes.

Understanding Better the Influential Factors of Commuters’ Multi-Day Travel Behavior: Evidence from Shanghai, China

“…The car is often the better choice for families. However, public transport was a better option for single people in multimodal specific situations [33]. Regarding bicycle travel mode in multimodal, the decisions of occasional cyclists to commute by bicycle are more affected by positive weather conditions; frequent cyclists are discouraged from cycling by more practical barriers, including wind speed and the need to be at multiple locations [34].…”

Commuting by Customized Bus: A Comparative Analysis with Private Car and Conventional Public Transport in Two Cities

“…The use of PT has been shown to decline as age and income increase. Women have a slightly higher probability of using PT for trip purposes other than commuting (Kuhnimhof et al 2006). Other factors that have been identified are quality of PT services, lack of connection, out-of-pocket travel cost, access distance to and from stations, and distance to/from home-work (Galdames et al 2001;Kingham et al 2001).…”

Measuring Public-Transport Network Connectivity Using Google Transit with Comparison across Cities

“…Kingham et al (2001) revealed that travelers are aware of the negative impact that excessive private vehicle use has on the environment and are willing to use PT, if it is a viable alternative. In today's society, the share of so-called "captive" PT users is seen to be declining as more households own cars (Kuhnimhof, Chlond et al 2006;Chapman 2007). As such, "non-captive" travelers' mode choice depends on the activities that will be undertaken and the location of those activities.…”

“…This brings a major change in the types of users. Patronage needs to be gained from those who have a choice between PT and car (Kuhnimhof, Chlond et al 2006). It is evident that to attract a large number of car users to switch to PT, the service quality offered has to be more market-competitive (Anable 2005).…”