hEART 2014 1

Measuring the Dynamic Behavioural Responses due to the Introduction of a New Extension

Tram Line by using Panel Survey: Preliminary Analysis

Nursitihazlin Ahmad Termida

Yusak. O. Susilo

Joel Franklin

Department of Transport Science,

KTH Royal Institute of Technology

hEART 2014 2

Introduction• Douglas (2003) - A ‘ramp-up’ factor in the patronage growth for 13

new or upgraded rail.• Chatterjee (2001) - Longer times and shorter times of responses.• Lanzendorf (2003, 2010) - The way the travellers have grown up

and their perspectives on their travel modes and habits influences the way we travel and make choices.

• Simma and Axhausen (2003) – The use of a particular travel mode at a young age positively influences the usage of the same mode for the rest of an individual’s life course, and the usage of other modes negatively.

• Example of the use of panel data studies: Chatterjee and Ma (2006, 2007), and Yáñez et al. (2010).

hEART 2014 3

Research Questions

• What are the changes occurred?• How many and when the new users start to

adopt the new tram?• Who are using it earlier than others? • Who have adopted the new tram as a part of

their regular mode choice?

hEART 2014 4

Case Study: The New Tram Line Service (Tvärbanan) Extension In Stockholm

The Instruments

(1) The two-week travel diary

(2) Psychological-related surveys

(3) Mental map-related questions

Survey Design

hEART 2014 5

Respondent Selection and Recruitment Process

• 100 individuals were targeted.– The main sample: Individuals who are ‘living close’ (approximately

500 metres) from the new tram line’s station.– The control sample: Approximately 20% of the samples are the

individuals who are ‘not living close’ (approximately 1 kilometre away) from the new tram line’s station.

• Overall, 75 individuals (with 14 control samples) participated in all three waves.

hEART 2014 6

TABLE 1 The Percentages of Socio-Demographic Characteristics of Respondents in each Wave

CharacteristicsWave 1 Wave 2 Wave 3 All waves(n = 92) (n = 83) (n = 77) (n = 75)

GenderMale 28.3 25.3 27.3 25.3Age (years)Below 16 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.716 - 25 10.9 9.6 9.1 9.326 - 45 45.7 44.6 42.9 41.346 - 65 26.1 26.5 27.3 28.0Above 65 15.2 16.9 18.2 18.7Marital statusSingle 22.8 14.5 19.5 18.7Married 41.3 43.4 39.0 40.0Divorced 8.7 12.0 13.0 13.3Other (e.g. living with partner/friends/relatives/other) 27.2 30.1 28.6 28.0Employment statusFull-time employed 37.0 41.0 41.6 41.3Part-time employed 8.7 10.8 9.1 9.3Self-employed 7.6 3.6 2.6 2.7Looking after the home or family 13.0 12.0 11.7 12.0Permanently retired 15.2 16.9 18.2 18.7Unemployed and seeking for work 2.2 0 0 0At school 4.3 6.0 6.5 6.7In further or higher education 5.4 4.8 5.2 5.3Permanently sick or disabled 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.3Unable to work due to short-term illness or injury 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.3Other (unemployed) 4.3 2.4 2.6 1.3Driving license ownershipOwned by respondent 72.8 75.9 76.6 76.0Car ownershipOwned at least a car 63.0 66.3 62.3 64.0Gross monthly income (before tax)Low-class income (< 15,000 SEK) 12.0 9.6 15.6 16.0Medium-class income (15,000 - 54,999 SEK) 60.9 62.7 49.4 48.0High-class income (> 55,000 SEK) 27.2 27.7 35.1 36.0Intention in using the new tram service sooner 48.9 N/A N/A N/A after its openingDid use the new tram service sooner after its opening N/A 20.5 22.1 22.7Note: N/A = not applicable.

The question on using the new service sooner after its opening defined as individuals who already used the new extension tram line service within one week after its introduction.

hEART 2014 7

Descriptive Analysis

What are the changes occurred?

(1) Changes in modal split

walk

cycle

motorcycle/moped

car driver

car passenger

bus

tram

subway

train

other

taxi

skateboard

0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0%

wave 3wave 2wave 1

Mode share

Alte

rnati

ve/m

ode

hEART 2014 8

Descriptive Analysis (cont.)

TABLE 2 Percentage-Point Changes of Mode in General and for the Main and Control Samples

  Walk Cycle Motorcycle Car Car Bus Tram Subway Train Taxi Skateboard Other

        driver passenger              

General

W1 - W2 +0.43 -1.18 +0.07 +0.10 +0.14 +0.99 +1.63 -0.68 -0.19 -0.10 0 -0.46

W2 - W3 +0.23 +0.22 -0.30 -0.52 -0.37 -1.33 -0.69 -1.15 -0.79 0 +0.01 0

W1 - W3 +0.66 -0.97 -0.23 -0.42 -0.23 -0.33 +0.94 -1.83 -0.98 -0.10 +0.01 -0.46

Main Sample

W1 - W2 +0.22 -0.97 +0.07 +0.53 +0.17 +0.71 +1.87 -0.63 -0.24 -0.07 0 -0.43

W2 - W3 -0.04 +0.23 -0.30 -0.86 -0.35 -1.05 -0.72 -1.20 -0.65 0 +0.01 0

W1 - W3 +0.17 -0.73 -0.23 -0.33 -0.17 -0.35 +1.15 -1.83 -0.89 -0.07 +0.01 -0.43

Control Sample

W1 - W2 +0.22 -0.22 0 -0.43 -0.03 +0.29 -0.24 -0.04 +0.06 -0.03 0 -0.03

W2 - W3 +0.27 -0.01 0 +0.35 -0.03 -0.27 +0.03 +0.04 -0.14 0 0 0

W1 - W3 +0.49 -0.23 0 -0.09 -0.06 +0.01 -0.22 0 -0.09 -0.03 0 -0.03

hEART 2014 9

Descriptive Analysis (cont.)(2) Changes in travel characteristics

TABLE 3 Travel characteristics

  WAVE 1 WAVE 2 WAVE 3 NTS 2011Control Main Control Main Control Main DATA

  (n = 14) (n = 61) (n = 14) (n = 61) (n = 14) (n = 61)  Number of tripsTrips/person 24.4 27.0 22.6 28.8 24.5 24.4Trips/person/day 1.74 1.93 1.61 2.06 1.75 1.74 1.86Travel distance (kilometres traveled)Traveled distance/person 230.5 264.1 221.3 230.6 261.5 247.9Traveled distance/person/day 16.5 18.9 15.8 16.5 18.7 17.7 44.4Travel time (minutes)Travel time/ person 529.7 726.8 540.9 711.7 616.6 706.2Travel time/person/day 37.8 51.9 38.6 50.8 44.0 50.4Travel time/person/day/trip 21.7 26.9 24.0 24.7 25.2 29.0 28.7Trip purposes (% of trips)Pick-up or drop-off somebody 5.9 6.4 7.6 4.6 3.5 4.9 2.7Private business 6.2 6.7 7.6 6.4 9.6 6.9 3.8Professional business 0 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.9 0.6 6.0School/education 2.1 3.4 4.1 2.8 3.2 2.7 5.5Work 23.2 17.0 19.3 16.4 20.4 17.8 15.8Shopping daily needs 5.6 4.5 4.7 4.8 4.1 5.2 16.4Shopping long-term needs 2.9 3.0 3.2 4.0 2.3 2.3 7.1Leisure 7.6 18.4 7.3 16.8 12.2 16.0 30.1Other (e.g. doing research) 0.6 0.7 0 1.3 0.9 3.0 12.6Go back home 46.0 39.6 45.9 42.7 42.9 40.6 0Number of transfer(s) made in a single trip (% of trips)No transfer 85.0 84.1 84.2 85.2 89.5 86.4 68.31 transfer 10.3 12.0 11.7 12.5 6.4 11.9 16.42 transfers 4.1 3.9 4.1 2.0 3.8 1.7 12.03 transfers 0.6 0 0 0.3 0.3 0 3.3Percentage of trips with different modesAs a public transport user 46.0 43.2 52.8 46.0 44.3 42.0 18.0As a private vehicle user 34.3 20.8 26.6 24.0 33.2 20.7 31.7Walking and cycling 19.1 35.9 19.9 29.9 22.4 37.3 45.9Use both PT and private vehicle 0.6 0.1 0.6 0.1 0 0 2.2Other user (e.g. flight, maritime) 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.2

hEART 2014 10

Descriptive Analysis (cont.)How many and when the new users start to adopt the new tram?• Time taken for the respondents to use the new tram service after its

introduction:

hEART 2014 11

Multivariate AnalysisWho use the new tram earlier than others?

Marginally (at α = 10%), the elderly (age above 65), with middle-income (15,000 – 54,999 SEK) and who have no dependent children within their household are likely to use the new tram earlier than others.

hEART 2014 12

Multivariate Analysis (Cont.)Who have adopted the new tram service as a part of their regular mode choice?

Marginally (at α = 5%), high income travellers (more than 55,000 SEK), hold a driving license and public transport season ticket, have no dependent children within their household and the travellers who used the tram mode in the previous day are likely to adopt the new tram service as a part of their regular mode choice.

hEART 2014 13

Conclusions• Changes in modal split = The tram shares increased by +0.94 pp, whilst

subway shares decreased by -1.83 pp. • Changes in travel characteristics = The main sample made more trips in

wave 2 survey compared to other waves, and public transport users for both sample groups are at their lowest in wave 3 but with the highest value of walking and cycling user type.

• The ‘quick-response’ users = The elderly, middle-income travellers, and have no dependent children within their household.

• The new tram line service user = High-income travellers, hold a driving license and public transport season ticket, have no dependent children within their household and the ones who used the tram mode in the previous day.

• The panel data of this study has a large potential to study the dynamics and learning processes of individuals in using a new transport service.

hEART 2014 14

Further Directions of the Study

• The travellers’ objective and subjective factors over time (in all waves) may be examined.

• The use of a TPB model towards the time-scale responses is also in our interest for future studies.

• A more systematic analysis on the changes in individuals’ mental map over time would also be some original and useful topics to be studied in the future.

hEART 2014 15

Thank you…

hEART 2014 16

References1. Douglas, N. Patronage Ramp-Up Factors for New Rail Services. Douglas Economics Ltd. Report,

February 2003. www.douglaseconomics.co.nz/reports.htm. Accessed May 28, 2013.

2. Chatterjee, K. (2001). Asymmetric Churn – Academic Jargon or a Serious Issue for Transport Planning? Transport Planning Society, April 2001. www.tps.org.uk/files/Main/Library/2001/0001chatterjee.pdf . Accessed May 28, 2013.

3. Lanzendorf, M. Mobility Biographies: A New Perspective for Understanding Travel Behavior. Presented at 10th International Conference on Travel Behavior Research, Lucerne, August 2003.

4. Lanzendorf, M. Key Events and Their Effect on Mobility Biographies: The Case of Childbirth. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation. Vol. 4, No. 5, 2010, pp. 272-292.

5. Simma, A. and Axhausen, K.W. Commitments and Modal Usage: Analysis of German and Dutch Panels. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board. No. 1854, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2003, pp. 22-31 .

6. Chatterjee, K. and Ma, K. Behavioural Responses to A New Transport Option: A Dynamic Analysis Using A Six-Month Panel Survey. Presented at 11th International Conference on Travel Behavior Research, Kyoto, August 2006.

7. Chatterjee, K. and Ma, K. Modelling the Timing of User Responses to a New Urban Public Transport Service: Application of Duration Modelling. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2010, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2007, pp. 62-72.

8. Yáñez, M. F., Mansilla, P. and Ortúzar, J. de D. The Santiago Panel: Measuring the Effects of Implementing Transantiago. Transportation, Vol. 37, 2010, pp. 125-149.