Travel Survey November 2014
Minutes per person per week Introduction 60 Time spent cycling per week by age group 50 40 30 5 12 13 17 18+ 20 10 0 1989/90 1997/98 2003-06 2004-07 2005-08 2006-09 2007-10 2008-11 2009-12 2010-13 2011-14
Hours per person per week Introduction 2.5 Time spent walking per week by age group 2 1.5 1 5-12 years 13-17 years 18 + years 0.5 0 Powerpoint presentation - 2014
Introduction 12.50 Thousands of kilometers travelled per person per year 12.00 11.50 11.00 Pedestrian Cyclist Public transport 10.50 10.00 Car travel 9.50 2003 2006 2004 2007 2005 2008 2006 2009 2007 2010 2008 2011 2009 2012 2010 2013
GPS Devices Hand held device that tracks where people go in a given day A survey was sent to each person at the end of the day to ask the purpose of each trip and how they were travelling Advantages Easy to use Accurate Long battery life Disadvantages Person needs to remember to take the device Expensive to buy and send to different houses
Smartphone apps Smartphone app installed on participants phones The app tracks uses the GPS tracking function to record where people go on their allocated days Participants are sent a survey at the end of each day asking them purpose of each trip and how they travelled Advantages Cheap to carry out Disadvantages Low battery life Not always accurate
Online diaries People fill in a self-complete online diary of where they have gone the previous day People can see their trip on a map and make adjustments Advantages Significant cost savings Reasonably easy to use Disadvantages Can be difficult to untangle journeys with multiple trips High internet penetration
Length of the sample Current survey looks at 2 days New methods have the potential to survey 5 to 7 days Ability to reduce the sample without reducing the quality
Sampling Tested two methods of sampling Door to door SmileCity online panel
Trips per day Trips per day for different methods 7 Trips per day by method pilot survey and standard survey Higher trips per day can indicate higher quality for the method 6 5 4 4.4 4.3 3.4 4.1 5.7 4.0 Initial inspection shows promising results 3 2 1 0 gps device android app apple app online main respondent online other respondents Current survey Trip collection method
Different methods capture different trips Number of trips per day for car drivers and passengers Online methods good at capturing driving trips 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 Wave 1 1.5 1.0 0.5 Wave 2 Wave 3 0.0 gps device online main respondent online other respondents Current survey Collection method
Different methods capture different trips 0.8 0.7 Number of trips per day for pedestrians Online methods worse at capturing pedestrian trips 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 Wave 1 Wave 2 Wave 3 0.1 0.0 gps device online main respondent online other respondents Current survey Collection method
Different sampling and different trip numbers 7 6 5 4 3 Trips per day by survey method and trip type Current travel survey Pilot - commercial panel Pilot - non commercial panel Commercial panel appears to have different characteristics to other sampled participants 2 1 0 Car passenger or driver Pedestrian Public transport
Overall findings for the methods Smartphones The potential exists but the technology is not mature enough yet GPS devices Work well, but needs to be made cheaper for it to be viable Online diaries Potential to significantly reduce cost Recorded more trips than any other method low under-reporting Likely to be a secondary method if other methods are also used Length of survey People are willing to accept a longer survey length with different methods
Panel We retain people s contact details to construct a transport panel that allows us to cheaply push out transport related questions Questions can be pushed out to only a subset of people according to demographics or geography Significantly increases the transport information base Helps us amalgamate a number of different areas data collections
Panel results 90.0% Factors that are important or very important in most recent car purchase choice 80.0% 70.0% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% Fuel efficiency Safety features Safety rating Size Registration cost Insurance cost Price Reputation of that make of vehicle