Potential uptake of adaptive transport services: An exploration of service attributes and attitudes

Abstract

This paper describes an examination of people's preferences regarding a wide range of flexible and demand-responsive adaptive transport services in the Netherlands. We used a stated choice experiment, which included a set of attributes, such as access to the service, schedule, window of departure and arrival time, travel costs and travel time. Four mixed logit models were estimated based on a dataset of 3,632 observations (454 respondents). Various service attributes were found to have a significant influence on the potential of alternatives, including fixed stops and a wide time window (valued negatively) and door-to-door transport and unscheduled transport (valued positively). In addition, attitudes towards conventional and modern service types were relevant determinants for the potential uptake of ATS. In particular, having a positive attitude towards public transport was found to increase the likelihood of using stop-based (defined mobility) services. Finally, our results reveal that existing public transport users displayed a greater willingness to use flexible public transport alternatives, whereas car drivers were more inclined to use car-and ride-sharing services.

Usage and User Characteristics—Insights from MOIA, Europe’s Largest Ridepooling Service

“…In contrast to what Morsche et al [23] found in their study on hypothetical ridepooling usage, MOIA is not only an attractive option for people who are familiar with this form of shared mobility-like public transport users. Among the MOIA customers, the shares of car usage frequency as well as ownership rates are considerably higher than for the Hamburg average-pointing toward an important future potential to reduce car usage and ownership by offering a large-scale ridepooling service.…”

“…Morsche et al [23] also looked into people's preferences for demand-responsive transport (for several service variations) in the Netherlands. They applied a stated choice experiment, and found that the willingness to use of what the authors call "collective taxi" is positively influenced by flexible stops, small pick-up and drop-off time windows, respondents' mobility-related variables (e.g., possessing a driver's license), as well as their attitudes.…”

Improving Rural Accessibility: A Multilayer Approach

“…Customers' perceptions concern the attitude of people who are supposed to use the service [89,90]. More specifically, in rural and remote contexts, three main clusters should be taken into account: public transport; rural dependency on urban poles; digitalization of services.…”

The combination of e-bike-sharing and demand-responsive transport systems in rural areas: A case study of Velenje

“…Studies have shown that operational sustainability of FTS is not always granted; funding is often an open issue; and in a number of cases, a need for high subsidies has emerged ( Jokinen, Sihvola, & Mladenovic, 2019 ; OECD & ITF, 2015 ). Other detected barriers to the appeal, implementation, and use of FTS are poor understanding of mobility needs, the lack of integration with other modes, the difficulty in framing demand and user behavior, and the lack of communication between users and agency ( Brake, Mulley, Nelson, & Wright, 2007 ; Te Morsche, Puello, & Geurs, 2019 ; Velaga et al, 2012 ). The last big issue to consider is related to the lack of viable options to cover the “last mile” between public transport stops and people's final destinations.…”