Assessment of socio economic benefits of non-motorized transport (NMT) integration with public transit (PT)

Similar documents
Cycling Inclusive Transport Planning

Low Carbon Mobility Plan For Indian Cities

Bike Planner Overview

Determining bicycle infrastructure preferences A case study of Dublin

Green Mobility. Emani Kumar. Coordinator, ICLEI Asia & Executive Director, ICLEI South Asia.

VILNIUS SUMP. Gintarė Krušinskaitė International project manager place your logo here

INTEGRATED MULTI-MODAL TRANSPORTATION IN INDIA

BICYCLE SHARING SYSTEM: A PROPOSAL FOR SURAT CITY

Mobility Constraints of Children in Bangladesh: A Study on Travel to School in Dhaka City

RE-CYCLING A CITY: EXAMINING THE GROWTH OF CYCLING IN DUBLIN

The modes of government guidance for public bicycle operation and state-owned company operation: a case study of Hangzhou city in China

Economics of Highway Spending and Traffic Congestion. Todd Litman Victoria Transport Policy Institute Presented Strong Towns Webinar 3 February 2016

Kevin Manaugh Department of Geography McGill School of Environment

International Journal of Research (IJR) Vol-1, Issue-8, September *

Congestion Evaluation Best Practices

Concept of Sustainable Transport and integrated Land Use Planning- An Overview. Manfred Breithaupt GIZ Water, Energy, Transport

Briefing Paper #1. An Overview of Regional Demand and Mode Share

Konstantin Glukhenkiy Economic Affairs Officer

Driverless Vehicles Potential Influence on Bicyclist Facility Preferences

PBS CITY SPECIFIC PLAN VADODARA. Stakeholder Workshop

PLANNING FOR BICYCLE INFRASTRCTURE A Case of Gurgaon City

Understanding the Pattern of Work Travel in India using the Census Data

Public Bicycle Sharing Scheme

PLANNING FOR FIRST &LAST MILE CONNECTIVITY FOR MASS TRANSIT USERS

AGENDA. Stakeholder Workshop

Decongestion Strategies for Delhi Roads

WELCOME. City of Greater Sudbury. Transportation Demand Management Plan

LAST MILE CONNECTIVITY (LMC) FOR ENHANCING ACCESSIBILITY OF RAPID TRANSIT SYSTEMS

THE SOCIAL IMPACT OF BICYCLE IN SÃO PAULO May 2018

Identification of Factors Affecting Modal Shift in Lahore

Attachment A: Columbus Area Metropolitan Transportation Plan Objectives, Performance Measures, and Targets

How To Encourage More Efficient Transportation in Brazilian Cities

Dalhousie University Commuter Study

Active Travel and Exposure to Air Pollution: Implications for Transportation and Land Use Planning

Roadway Bicycle Compatibility, Livability, and Environmental Justice Performance Measures

Paper submitted to the Scottish Transport Studies Group (STSG) April 2004

I-105 Corridor Sustainability Study (CSS)

The Limassol SUMP Planning for a better future. Apostolos Bizakis Limassol, May 16, th Cyprus Sustainable Mobility and ITS conference

Life Transitions and Travel Behaviour Study. Job changes and home moves disrupt established commuting patterns

DEVELOPMENT OF A SET OF TRIP GENERATION MODELS FOR TRAVEL DEMAND ESTIMATION IN THE COLOMBO METROPOLITAN REGION

ENGAGING ENTREPRENEURS TO PROVIDE INTEGRATED MOBILITY SOLUTION AMIT BHATT, DIRECTOR- INTEGRATED TRANSPORT, WRI INDIA

Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations APPENDIX C TRANSIT STATION ACCESS PLANNING TOOL INSTRUCTIONS

The Case for New Trends in Travel

Memorandum. Drive alone

Bike Share Social Equity and Inclusion Target Neighborhoods

BICYCLE INFRASTRUCTURE PREFERENCES A CASE STUDY OF DUBLIN

SURVEY: TRAFFIC VOLUME COUNT AUGUST 2017

Travel Behaviour Study of Commuters: Results from the 2010 Dalhousie University Sustainability Survey

Factors Associated with the Bicycle Commute Use of Newcomers: An analysis of the 70 largest U.S. Cities

Cities Connect. Cities Connect! How Urbanity Supports Social Inclusion

Development, transport and traffic management in Copenhagen

Active Transportation on the Rise

FACTS AND FIGURES: MAKING THE CASE FOR COMPLETE STREETS IN LEE COUNTY

Urban planners have invested a lot of energy in the idea of transit-oriented

8403 Colesville Road, Silver Spring, Maryland USA Telephone: (240) Fax: (240)

NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORT AND SUSTAINABLE URBAN PLANNING: A CASE STUDY OF PUNE METROPOLITAN REGION

Pre-Plan Consultation Summary

Public Consultation Centre For. Transportation Master Plan Update. Information Package

Urban Transport Service Level Benchmarking in Urban Transport for Indian Cities

The Who and What: Bus Rapid Transit Riders and Systems in the U.S.

How familiar are you with BRT?

Urban Street Design and Development

Thursday 18 th January Cambridgeshire Travel Survey Presentation to the Greater Cambridge Partnership Joint Assembly

MOBILITY CHALLENGES IN HILL CITIES

Motorized Transportation Trips, Employer Sponsored Transit Program and Physical Activity

Transportation Master Plan Advisory Task Force

The Impact of Placemaking Attributes on Home Prices in the Midwest United States

A Framework For Integrating Pedestrians into Travel Demand Models

APPENDIX W OFF-MODEL ADJUSTMENTS

Here is an outline of this presentation.

Role of Non-motorized Transport in Million plus Cities

Public Works AGENDA ITEM D-2 STAFF REPORT

Green mobility and traffic safety in Copenhagen

Public Bikesharing in North America: Early Operator and User Understanding

Drivers of cycling demand and cycling futures in the Danish context.

Camosun College Modal Split

Do New Bike Share Stations Increase Member Use?: A Quasi-Experimental Study

WILMAPCO Public Opinion Survey Summary of Results

BICYCLE SHOPS MEETINGS AND SURVEY AUGUST 16, 2017

Investment in Active Transport Survey

A Traffic Operations Method for Assessing Automobile and Bicycle Shared Roadways

92% COMMUTING IN THE METRO. Congested Roadways Mode Share. Roadway Congestion & Mode Share

HAVE DUTCH CITIES MADE THE TRANSITION TOWARDS NON- MOTORISED TRANSPORT?

2010 Pedestrian and Bicyclist Special Districts Study Update

Canada s Capital Region Delegation to the Velo-City Global 2010 Conference

TOWARDS A BIKE-FRIENDLY CANADA A National Cycling Strategy Overview

INSIGHTS ON HOW BIKESHARING SUPPORTS URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Modelling of Tun Mustapha Residential College s Students Readiness to Cycling Mode in University

Behavioural analysis of Pedestrians while crossing the. road at intersection

Helsinki. Explaining Active Transportation Success in a City with Winter. Karl Saidla, Ph.D. Candidate, University of Ottawa, Human Kinetics

Nomination. Halton Region in Context

ATTACHMENT 4 - TDM Checklist. TDM Checklist Overview

Promotions and Outreach Programme

Le Quan HOANG * and Toshiyuki OKAMURA** Keywords: commuter, motorcycle, mass rapid transit, travel intention, Ho Chi Minh City, developing countries

2011 Origin-Destination Survey Bicycle Profile

Urban Transport Policy-making changing perspectives and consequences

Temporal and Spatial Variation in Non-motorized Traffic in Minneapolis: Some Preliminary Analyses

DEVELOPMENT OF SUSTAINABLE URBAN TRANSPORT STRATEGIES FOR SALEM CITY

CONDUITS DST-Tel Aviv-Yafo Case Study

Preview. Tables in your paper Mass Transit as alternative to auto California s problems in urban transportation

Transcription:

Assessment of socio economic benefits of non-motorized transport (NMT) integration with public transit (PT) Case study of Bike share (BS) system in Pune, India Parvesh Kumar Sharawat Department of Policy Studies TERI School of advance studies Vasant Kunj, New Delhi 110070, India

Research Question and Hypothesis Research Question - Will provision of a bike share system influence modal choice of existing and potential commuters to benefit individual users and the city? Hypothesis 1 Hypothesis 2

Research objectives To examine the importance of NMT and PT integration in urban transport and the relevance of Bike Sharing (BS) system in that context To assess the benefits and key variables of modal choice of BS system To quantitively analyse the potential mode shift variables and assess the modal shift of commuters in an identified case study city To derive the individual and the city benefits due to potential modal shift.

Objective 3 & 4 Objective 1 & 2 Methodological Approach Data analysis and results - Correlation matrix analysis - Logistic regression modelling (stated and revealed preference)

Literature review Significant indicators affecting the mode shift to BS Cyclist or non-cyclist Age Gender Household size Household monthly income Personal monthly income Occupation Vehicle ownership Bicycle ownership Frequency of trip Purpose of trip Access and egress time Mainline time and distance Bicycle theft Perception of transportation system and cycling infrastructure Willingness to pay for BS Frequency of reference i.e., most commonly referred variables Derivability from the benefits Methodological consistency

Literature review Benefit of BS and PT integration Individual Users benefits Reduced cost of travel - access and egress to PT Improved health Improvement in safety and comfort of cyclist Change in access and egress travel time to PT Cost saving for school trips The City benefits Encourages smart growth mixed land use will reduce the trip length thus making the city more cycle friendly Rationalization of parking demand Better street interface The City benefits Reduced heat islands due to decrease in number of motorized vehicles Municipal expenditure reduction on public health care Municipality has to spend less money on constructing expensive Motor Vehicle infrastructures Decrease in Pollution Fossil fuel consumption reduction Decrease in congestion Economic equity Social equity gender equity Improvement in work trips accessibility of low-income users

Stratified sampling 2500 sample size Residential, Institutional, Commercial and transportation nodes Case study - Pune

Case study - Pune

Mode share comparison Mode share (%) HH Survey (2016) CMP (2008) Metro DPR (2012) Walk 46.9 22.0 25.0 25 Cycle 3.06 11.1 8.8 18 4W 5.54 10.2 6.3 12 2W 29.04 37.2 38.6 29 IPT 11.3 7.2 8.3 6 PT 4.16 12.3 13.0 10 Wilbur Smith (2008) PCTRA 1.92 1.3-1.26 Total number 6635200 399113 4865117 - of trips Population 34,61,497 (PMC area) 29,70,000 (projected for 2007 from 2001 census PMC area) 37,56,345 (projected for 2011 from 2001 census - PMC area) 42,00,000 (2001-PMR area)

Logistic regression modelling approach

Results of logistic regression Significant indicators Access Egress Short trips Long trips MLH time likelihood increases with MLH Gender women are more likely to use Age less likely to used with increasing age MLH time likelihood increases with MLH Occupation - businessman, housewives and students less likely to use Cyclist non cyclists less likely to use Gender women are less likely to use Frequency of trip occasional travellers are less likely to use Perceptions - strong believer of Pune transport system is generally safe are more likely to use. And strong believers of Pune transport system has no adverse effect on health are less likely to use. Also, believers of Separate cycle tracks on busy main roads as important cycling infrastructure are more likely to use. Gender women are less likely to use the PT WTP respondents who are willing to pay upto INR 200 for monthly subscription are more likely to use the PT. However, probability decreases with further increase in subscription charges.

Logistic regression user survey City demographic (2016 projected population) total trips Modelled probability of shift Extrapolation on HH data PCTR, short and long trips Potential modal shift to Bike share system Modal shift at various cut off probability points Benefits estimation

Potential modal shift to Bike share system Mode 0.5 cut off 0.6 cut off 0.7 cut off 0.8 cut off 0.9 cut off Short trips to BS Long trips to PT Short trips to BS Long trips to PT Short trips to BS Long trips to PT Short trips to BS Long trips to PT Short trips to BS Long trips to PT Walk 99% 100% 92% 100% 69% 33% 42% 33% 8% 0% Cycle 100% 93% 99% 93% 95% 58% 75% 51% 29% 0% 2wheeler 96% 90% 92% 91% 74% 62% 32% 38% 6% 0% Car 100% 85% 91% 85% 61% 50% 30% 35% 0% 0% PT 99% - 89% - 67% - 31% - 5% - Auto 95% 75% 84% 75% 65% 17% 40% 17% 7% 0% Total 98% 88% 91% 89% 71% 44% 40% 35% 9% 0% At 0.5 probability cut off point there is high percentage shift to BS and PT which becomes almost zero when the probability cut off point increases to 0.9. The probability cut off point of 0.8 has revealed moderate shift of 35-45% which has also been observed in the other modal shift studies as well (Bajracharya, 2008; Fatima & Kumar, 2014; 3; 10; P V, Thomas, & Sam, 2014; Rastogi, 2010; Thamiz Arasan & Vedagiri, 2011; Vedagiri & Arasan, 2009)

Potential modal shift to Bike share system Mode Existing 0.5 cut off 0.6 cut off 0.7 cut off 0.8 cut off 0.9 cut off Walk 47% 11.5% 14.0% 22.4% 32.1% 43.9% Cycle 3% 0.1% 0.1% 0.3% 0.9% 2.3% Bike share 0% 63.3% 59.2% 45.4% 25.4% 5.2% Two wheeler 29% 4.6% 5.1% 10.8% 20.1% 28.1% Car 6% 0.9% 1.1% 2.8% 3.9% 5.5% PT 11% 18.8% 19.3% 16.2% 14.9% 11.0% Auto rickshaw 4% 0.8% 1.2% 2.2% 2.9% 4.0% It was presumed that Pune will have a functional BS system and supporting NMT infrastructure to operate a city-wide BS system. Thus, potential mode shifts to BS system, at 0.8 cut off value, are expected under these conditions. However, in case the assumptions are not met, then the minimal mode shift at 0.9 cut off value will be more realistic. This will result in no potential shift to PT, and minimal shift from current PT and IPT users (12%) to BS system for short distance trips. The sizable percentage of potential shift will be from current cyclists (29%) and people who are walking (8%) for short distance trips There will be marginal shift from current two-wheeler users (6%) and no potential shift from car users to BS system for short distance trips. It is clear that the potential mode shift to BS system will be only for short distance trips and largely from walking and cycling users in the city.

Benefits - Existing and BS system scenario Benefit Existing Scenario BS scenario Reduced cost of travel of access and egress to PT Change in access and egress travel time to PT Cost saving for school trips due to use of PT and Bike share by school children Improvement in safety and comfort of cyclist due visibility created by Bike share system 0 0 Access and Egress Access and Egress time 35% MLH time 12.5 % MLH INR 3.0 approx. for 0 INR per trip Auto users, INR 4.0 approx. for two wheeler and PT users 3% 0.7%

Benefits - Existing and BS system scenario Benefit Cut off Cut off Cut off Cut off Cut off (0.5) (0.6) (0.7) (0.8) (0.9) Changes in congestion 20% 21% 13% 9% -1% Parking demand rationalization 54% 52% 35% 20% 1% Reduction in Municipal MV infrastructure development 53% 51% 34% 20% 1% Reduction in Fossil fuel consumption 80% 79% 53% 31% 1% Reduction in CO 2 emission 78% 77% 53% 30% 1% Economic equity 42% 40% 31% 19% 4% Social equity 24% 21% 9% 4% 0.2 % Improvement in work trips accessibility of low income HH users 8% 8% 6% 4% 0.6 %

Results and conclusions Pollution, congestion, fuel consumption, parking demand and investment in MV infrastructure Functional NMT infrastructure Safe NMT infrastructure

Policy and practice implications Bike share (BS) system as last mile would have more takers for mass transit with longer MLH like Metro and BRT and should be integrated. Investing in a city-wide bike share system will have higher impact in attaining sustainable mode shares than investing in a PT system for mid sized and small cities. Subscriptions are useful because people are more likely to use if they have already paid for it but subscription charges should be optimal. Women targeted outreach programs.

THANK YOU The research acknowledges the project Pune bicycle plan being led by itrans Pvt. Ltd. in partnership with CEE and PDA under which part of the data has been collected.