How commuters’ motivations to drive relate to propensity to carpool: Evidence from the United Kingdom and the United States

Abstract

This paper examines how commuter motivations to drive relate to propensities to carpool, using two sequential studies: Study 1 determines the key dimensions of commuters' motivations for driving using secondary data (N = 432) from staff and postgraduate student commuters at a United Kingdom university. We code the contents of the respondents' self-reported reasons for driving (i.e. the instrumental rationalities attributed to driving with respect to varying purposes) to identify keywords representing motivation to drive; we then analyse the keyword data using multidimensional scaling (MDS). Study 2 examines how the dimensions discovered through study 1 relate to propensity to carpool, using structural equation modelling (SEM). Data for Study 2 are the survey responses of commuters (N = 1028) based in the United States. The MDS reveals four key dimensions of motivation to drive. These capture instrumental rationalities for driving within four situational domains which we term: (1) Family; (2) Public transport impractical changes; (3) Rigid schedule; and (4) Non-urban areas. The SEM results show that the regression coefficients on propensity to carpool of Public transport impractical changes and Rigid schedule are significant and negative; the Family domain has a positive but nonsignificant regression coefficient. Regarding demographics, men's mean values on all four domain variables are significantly higher than those for women, except for the Family domain where the mean value for women is higher; meanwhile, age predicts decreasing propensity to carpool. Additionally, the situational domains of Public transport impractical changes, Rigid schedule and Non-urban areas significantly positively correlate. Consequently, overall, the results imply that addressing commuters' instrumental rationalities for driving, namely increasing schedule flexibility and providing more direct or quicker public transport, could indirectly encourage commuters to carpool. The study makes an original contribution by estimating the causal relationship between commuters' motivation to drive and propensity to carpool.

MaaS for the suburban market: Incorporating carpooling in the mix

“…This is consistent with the results from surveys on Intention to Use the RideMyRoute App (Wright et al, 2108). Neoh et al (2018) identify that the ideal characteristics of commuters who will consider carpooling are that they have flexible working hours, access to direct routes or near-direct and swift routes on public transport; and, related to the latter, live in a Non-urban area. Figure 5 presents the main carpooling facilitators for commuters according to Neoh et al (2018).…”

“…Neoh et al (2018) identify that the ideal characteristics of commuters who will consider carpooling are that they have flexible working hours, access to direct routes or near-direct and swift routes on public transport; and, related to the latter, live in a Non-urban area. Figure 5 presents the main carpooling facilitators for commuters according to Neoh et al (2018). This suggests that combining carpool trips with direct and swift public transport services in suburban and peripheral areas fits several key characteristics of the ideal carpooler profile, which show the greatest potential for travel behaviour change.…”

“…So, while spatial density remains a factor in finding suitable matches, it is much less so with RideMyRoute than with conventional carpool matching services. This means that carpool initiatives can be targeted more towards commuters who fit the ideal carpooler profile (Neoh et al, 2018) and whose potential for behavioural modification is greatest -i.e. commuters in non-urban areas with a flexible schedule, who have access to direct routes or near-direct and swift routes on public transport.…”

“…In conclusion, the route planning algorithm developed for the RideMyRoute App, described in this paper, which combines carpool trip offers with public transport services, offers possibilities for accessing high quality public transport corridors for suburban dwellers. These are the types of trips which fit the ideal carpooler profile (Neoh et al (2018)) and which offer the greatest potential for energy saving potential.…”

Sustainable Commuting: Results from a Social Approach and International Evidence on Carpooling

“…Individually, carpool users can benefit from shared travel costs, travel-time savings from driving in (HOV) lanes, reduced commuter stress, and, often, preferential parking and other incentives, in addition to environmental benefits [43][44][45][46][47]. The analysis of carpooling has been developed worldwide, as in China [48], France [49][50][51], the United States [52][53][54][55][56], Europe [57], the Netherlands [58,59], Greece [60], India [61], and Canada [62], among others.…”