Transcript Slide 1

ANALYZING AND ASSESSING THE
RELEVANCE OF LAST-MILE-LINKS FOR
RAILWAY TRIPS
Dipl.-Ing. Dr. techn. Harald FREY
Research Center of Transport Planning and Traffic Engineering
Institute of Transportation
Vienna University of Technology
18.07.2015
Part of the project „Last mile link“
The goal of the LML project (last mile link) is the development of a
special mobility service to close the link on a travel with public means of
transportation between the final station and the destination. The second
goal is to serve a service for local mobility at the travel destination.
70% of all car travelers say the reduced mobility at the final destination
without an own car is an essential decision criteria not to take public
means of transportation for a holiday trip.
The LML project will develop a general mobility system including a
business concept, the advancement of electronic systems for
reservation and positioning (e.g. for mobile phones) and a vehicle
concept. The developed system will be analyzed regarding to the cost
effectiveness and customer’s satisfaction.
18.07.2015
The „Last-mile“
• Coverage “last mile” biggest obstacle in the mobility chain
• structural conditions of this part of the route affect mode choice of
whole journey.
• Further restrictions especially for tourists (& business travellers)
arise concerning luggage transport and the lack of knowledge of
timetables and surroundings
• What boundary conditions of the mobility system can contribute to
reduce such barriers?
• conclusions for the reorganization of mobility in tourist regions in
order to raise the share of rail tourists.
Method:
Subjective criteria for the mode choice of 1.200 rail passengers were
queried, and the marginal conditions of three selected tourist regions
were compared with the mobility behaviour at arrival, stay and
departure.
18.07.2015
Mobility chain
Decision – relevant:
• road and rail infrastructure
(attractiveness) – interaction
• variety and convenience of
public transport services
(including processing of
reservation, payment, etc. for
the various elements of the
travel chain)
• mobility-related information
and link with information on
objectives / attractions
• type of pooling of transport
services with other tourism
services
Source: Planersocietät (2003)
18.07.2015
Car vs. public transport
Completley different conditions for PT and PMT
200
180
160
resistance (min)
140
costs
120
100
departure time
80
in-vehicle time
60
waiting time
40
access time
20
0
PMT
Car, Private motorized traffic
14.10.2009
PT
Public transport
Analyzing the changes in tourist mobility behaviour
Changes in the
means of
transportation
for holidays in
Germany
between the
years 1954 and
1989.
Only with a serious view on the
changes in the (structural)
boundary conditions (its causes)
strengthening of rail is possible.
18.07.2015
There are no so-called "mobility
needs". This reflects a lack of
satisfaction of other needs (eg
rest and recreation, sports, etc.
...)
Changes in the boundary conditions
• The construction of car infrastructure in the last 60 years has
changed the traffic behaviour enormously [1] [2] [3].
• Especially for non day-to-day trips like holiday trips or free time
trips on the weekend public transport lost a lot of share
compared to other modes [4].
• The infrastructure for car traffic damaged the environment of
sensitive areas and generated a lot of negative effects paid by
the society [2].
• The infrastructure of railways was (is) weakened by cutting of
branch lines (still done in Austria) which affects the accessibility
of several regions.
• The processes of urban sprawl due to the increasing speed in
motorised transport reduced the chances of public transport,
particularly the railway system, even further [3].
18.07.2015
Relevance of Information
Even if guests are made ​aware when booking through
PT-arrival
intensive information on the (good) public transport
PMT-arrival
accessibility of their destination it can be assumed that
a non-existent public transport use experience exclude
the possibility of usage PT. (Source: Planersocietät, 2003)
Same day day before over the week during month
half year
earlier
Only in combination and clear prioritization a
• modal
Information
as a to
command
in transportation
shift
publicvariable
transport
is possible
• Affects mode choice as a function of the attractors
(reduce capacity for motorized traffic and
• Soft facts: for example www.tourenautofrei.at/, green tourism, etc, ...
"warning"
from
congestions,
• simultaneously
Hard facts: structural conditions
(car-free
tourism
destinations,
pedestrian
etc.) area, etc.) vs. Car availability
Source: Planersocietät (2003)
18.07.2015
Examples for an area wide last-mile
linkage with public transport
•On site visitors without a car should have concrete benefits,
for example, Rail and bus stops located closer to the target
(bus stops closer to the destination than car parking spaces)
•Car free areas
• etc
18.07.2015
Situation
13.4% of Austrian citizens used the railway for their holiday trips
within Austria, compared to 5.8% for foreign country trips in 2008 .
Less than 10% used the railway for overall tourist trips [5].
The mode choice is influenced by:
•local/regional mobility services (hiking and ski-buses, valley bus
concepts, etc.) and accompanying measures (car-free townships,
collecting parking area)
•mobility infrastructure
•linkage (Railway station, connection to busses, pick-up services,
etc.)
•information (e.g. about local mobility services)
•frequency of changing means of transport
•luggage transport supply
•information about real costs of travelling
•measurements for sensitization
18.07.2015
Mobility behaviour
Causes for behaviour (car-user)
Need to change
Transportation of
luggage
Large distance from
station to
destination
18.07.2015
Means of transportation – specific groups
Survey of mobility behaviour of alpinists and hikers in the
Austrian alps (2005/2006)
Means of transportations for arrival
Car
85%
Means of transportations used in the region
Car
59%
In Switzerland, 45% of the mountain climbers use public
transport, almost three times higher than in Austria
(Muharet al., 2008).
18.07.2015
Milieu studies
Different typologies regarding different mobility offers and traffic calming measurements
(Source: Schindler 1999)
1. Eco-Conscious
· 23,4%
· prefers arrival by PT
· sets not so much value on PT on site
3. car-freaks
· 16,1%
· arrival by car
· no on site PT use
2. price-sensitive PT suppporter
· 35,1%
· locally PT offers are very important
·wants pick up/last-mile service
· very price-sensitive
4. price-sensitive
· 25,4%
· especially no cost increase
· -> free of costs PT
Between the groups no differences in age and profession, children, net
income were found.
public transport supporters are rather long-term guests and that both
public transport supporters and the price-sensitives can be inspired to
switch. [Source: Schindler,1999]
18.07.2015
Milieu studies
Car-free mobility (Germany)
• About one-quarter of households living without cars
• in large cities with over 500,000 inhabitants,
• 30-40% one in three households is car-free
• these are rather young and older people, rather
Singles
• high satisfaction with the car-free (75-90%)
• Deficits seen in the leisure traffic
• one third of car-free households voluntarily disclaimed
(higher income and education)
Source: Schlaffer 2002
If the quality of the last-mile linkage is improved the
public transport system in the region can be encouraged.
78% of the respondents could imagine to use public
transport to reach their destination.
18.07.2015
Survey
Subjective criteria for the mode choice of 1.200 rail
passengers between Vienna, Salzburg and Bischofshofen
(Salzburg region) were queried and the conditions of three
selected tourist regions were compared with the mobility
behaviour at arrival, stay and departure. The survey was
done in two regions (Attersee and Wachau) and in
Werfenweng, a soft-tourist-mobility best practice township.
Criteria
Werfenweng
Attersee
Wachau
Soft-mobility as an issue in the
regional tourism
++
+
+
Tourism intensity
+
+
++
Amount of same-day visitors
-
+
++
Arrival by car
++
++
+
Arrival rail/bus
++
+
-
18.07.2015
Survey
• choice of transportation
• Questions on criteria the people based their decision on
(about the mode of transport to/from the destination)
• differentiation between primary means of transport (for the
longest part of the trip) and the last mile to the destination.
respondents were asked to evaluate the transport connection
based on subjective criteria (school grade system) and to
give information about the (subjective) accessibility for certain
means of transportation.
• Relevant questions regarding the improvement of mobility at
the location of the vacation or business trip were asked.
respondents should rank predefined criteria in the order of
importance.
18.07.2015
The possibilities of local mobility (besides the transport of luggage) were
the main reason why people have chosen their car and did not travel
with public transport.
If you have chosen the car for travelling - why did you not use bus or train?
(mean value of the priorities, 1=most important to 4=no importance)
3
2.8
2.6
2.5
2.1
2.0
mean value
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
luggage
18.07.2015
change trains
local mobility
cheaper
For those tourists who travel by train
the comfort criteria is most relevant
If you have chosen train or bus for travelling - why did you not use car?
(mean value of the priorities, 1=most important to 4=no importance)
3.5
3.2
3
2.8
3.1
2.9
2.5
mean value
2.2
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
no car ownership/
availableness
18.07.2015
environmental
aspects
more comfortable
faster
cheaper
A shuttle service from or to the railway station and a good public
transport system in the holiday region is (besides free tickets for
public transport) important.
How do you think the mobility can be improved at the location of your
vacation or business?
(mean value of the priorities. 1 = most important to 8 = least important).
6.0
5.3
5.1
5.2
mean value
5.0
4.0
4.3
4.0
3.4
3.6
3.0
2.3
2.0
1.0
0.0
rental bikes electric car free ticket Rent-a-car/
(Rental)
for PT
Carsharing
18.07.2015
shuttle
service
from/to
railway
station
more offers
other
shuttle
of PT in the electric
service
region
vehicles (e- to holiday
scooter, e- destination
bikes, etc.)
Means of transportation for regional activities
50.0
47.1
43.143.6
45.0
40.0
share in %
35.0
37.1
32.7
31.1
30.0
25.0
20.0
17.9
16.4
15.0
10.0
5.9
7.5
5.0
5.5 6.3
2.0
2.0 1.8
0.0
pedestrian
cycling
Attersee
18.07.2015
public transport
Wachau
Werfenweng
car
other (taxi, cable
car, etc.)
Example from the mobility log
in %
Estimation of the average distance to the activities
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0
10
Attersee
20
30
Distance in km
Wachau
40
50
Werfenweng
Other indicators: duration of the activities, dartizipation with other persons,
means of transportation, etc.
18.07.2015
60
Car-free communities
Car-free communities (e.g. Zermatt in Switzerland) show
how efficient and sustainable mobility of tourists can be
locally achieved. The town centre is closed for cars and
people have to park their cars at a collecting parking area
outside. People who arrive by train have the same or even
better conditions to manage the last mile to their destination,
if the station is nearby the town centre. Electric vehicles take
the people to their final destination [12].
18.07.2015
• A comparison of capabilities of car-free respectively so called soft-mobil
touristic offerings shows that at least 20% of tourists could be easily reached
[11].
• Not the accessibility of the community is the main important issue for
holiday-makers but the quality of nature and the possibilities of recovery or
other activities [5].
• The local organisation of the motorized vehicles affects the means of
transportation onsite and has a significant influence on the life quality for the
inhabitants of tourist communities as well as the quality of holidays for
tourists.
• Werfenweng in Austria shows approaches for an organisation of local
mobility without direct railway accessibility.
• Car-free townships show that people adopt their behaviour under
consideration of local boundary conditions. An intelligent organization of
the motorised individual traffic enhances the chances for public transport
and manages the problem of the last-mile link.
18.07.2015
References
[1] Environmental Balance of Transport Austria 1950-1996, Data Handbook, Federal Ministry for the
Environment, Youth and Family Affairs, Vienna, 1997
[2] Verkehr in Zahlen Österreich - Ausgabe 2007, Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Innovation und
Technologie, Vienna, 2007
[3] H. Knoflacher: Grundlagen der Verkehrs- und Siedlungsplanung: Verkehrsplanung, Verlag Böhlau,
2007
[4] Verkehrsclub Österreich 1/1994, Wege zum Autofreien Tourismus, Wien, 1994
[5] Statistik Austria, Urlaubs- und Geschäftsreisen 2008, Wien, 2008
[6] Muhar A., Schauppenlehner T., Brandenburg C., Arnberger A., Trends- und Handlungsbedarf im
Sommer-Bergtourismus, in OeAV-Dokumente Nr. 5, Aktivierungsprogramm umweltfreundliche
Anreise in die Berge, Innsbruck, 2008
[7] http://www.vmobil.at/
[8] Forschungsforum 3/95. Autofreier Tourismus in Österreich. Das Tälerbusprojekt Lungau, Murau,
Nockgebiet – Ein innovatives Modell, 1995
[9] Planersocietät, Ergebnisse der Besucherbefragung im Landkreis Wernigerode unter
Berücksichtigung einer freizeitmobilitätsstilbasierten Typologie Bericht für das Projekt MobiHarz Mobilitätsmanagement und – service für einen umweltfreundlichen Ausflugs- und Kurzurlaubsverkehr,
2003
[10] Umweltbundesamt Österreich: Erreichbarkeiten alpiner Tourismusstandorte mit dem öffentlichen
Verkehr, Wien, 2009
[11] Ch. Schindler (1998), Chancen sanfter Mobilität in Österreich – die Akzeptanz von
Verkehrsberuhigungsmaßnahmen, ÖGAF Tourismus Memo, 1999
[12] http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zermatt
18.07.2015
Thank you for attention!
contact:
Harald Frey
Phone: +43 (1) 588 01-23117
Fax:
+43 (1) 588 01-23199
Email:
[email protected]
18.07.2015