Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
MOBILITY ATTITUDES, PERCEPTIONS AND MOTIVATIONS OF SARAJEVO RESIDENTS:
SURVEY REPORT
LEAD RESEARCHER AND AUTHOR: DRAGANA PETROVIĆ
DECEMBER 2019
1
The research was conducted by SEE Change Net (Southeast European Change Network Foundation) to support the Canton of Sarajevo and the City of Sarajevo in developing the first Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan (SUMP) as part of the regional project "Sustainable Urban Mobility in South East European Countries" (SUMSEEC II), which is implemented under the Open Regional Fund for South East Europe - Energy Efficiency (GIZ ORF-EE)
The project is supported by the German Ministry of Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) and is implemented by GIZ.
The survey was conducted by Ipsos in the period 03.10.2019 - 10.10.2019, on a representative sample of 500 adult respondents.
Special thanks to Ipsos and Dragana Petrović.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) License. To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/.
2
Executive Summary
This report presents the results of a phone survey, which was designed by Dragana Petrović (a researcher who has worked with Ipsos Serbia for over a decade and has organized over 200 social and marketing research studies, provided methodology and analysis for over 30 social research studies) and executed by Ipsos BiH using the CATI (Computer Assisted Telephone Surveying) data collection method. The survey was conducted in October (3.10.-10.10.) 2019 with a population sample of 500 residents from the Canton of Sarajevo. The sample was a two-stage, stratified random sample1 based on the BiH Census of 2013: It was stratified by Municipalities and type of settlements within the Canton of Sarajevo and is a representative quota by gender and age within the given Municipalities. Additional factors about the survey respondents were documented through the survey, including financial situation of the household, education level, employment status, as well as specific transport-related factors such as car ownership, main mode of mobility and several others.2 The confidence interval for the conducted research is +/- 4.4. The confidence interval tells us the interval at which population parameters may deviate from the results obtained. The confidence level on the basis of which we calculated the confidence interval is 95%, which means that with 95% certainty we can state that the results obtained from the selected sample could be generalised to the entire population of Sarajevo Canton, i.e. that the deviation from the obtained results is a maximum of 4.4. The survey explores their perceptions and attitudes towards different modes of transport and gathers insights about motivational factors which might cause a switch from driving to more environmentally friendly modes of transport, such as public transport, walking, and cycling. Some of the main outcomes of the survey are: Car and non-car modal split:
• Almost half of the surveyed adults (46.5%) stated that they don’t drive cars - either because their household does not own a car, because they don’t have a driver’s license, or for other reasons. (A share of those who do not drive themselves, use cars as passengers.) Looking at the population of the Canton of Sarajevo, this number would be even higher if children and youth younger than 183 would be taken into consideration (approximately 60% of population).
Gender and transport mode: • There is a clear gender gap when it comes to transportation in Sarajevo: In the surveyed
households that own a car (77%), twice as many men are car drivers compared to women (73.2% vs. 36.6%). As many as 37.4% of the surveyed men said that they always opt for driving, while only 11.1% of women identified driving as their number one transportation choice. Almost every fifth male respondent (19.3%) stated that he never uses public transport, while only 6.7% of the women said this.
1 The two stages, which ensure the randomness of the sample, represented the choice of the household through a simple random selection of the household and the selection of the respondents selected from the selected household according to the quota criterion. 2 Please see Annex for this data. 3 In 2018, 15.62% of the Canton population was 14 years old or younger (no data is available for the age group up to age 18).
3
Income and transport mode: • Further socio-demographic characteristics partly play a role in the choice of
transportation. For example, those with a higher-economic status tend to use public transport less often; people with higher education (40.4%) and those living in the centre (39.2%) are the strongest represented groups among those who say they walk very often.
Mitigating Safety Risks:
• The survey reveals a massive discrepancy in the perception of driving behaviour: Almost all car drivers (95.6%) say about themselves that they always slow down near pedestrian crossings, give advantage to pedestrians and actively look out for cyclists (94.1%).
• However, in contrast to this self-perception by drivers, over two thirds of all respondents (68.3%) said that other drivers do not show safe and decent driving behaviour. Concerns about safety are also the main barriers stopping more people from walking and cycling more frequently where driver's behaviour plays an important role. Further there is almost universal agreement that drivers do park on sidewalks - getting in the way of the pedestrian flows (mentioned by over 80%).
Environment and Air Quality: • Again, there is a massive discrepancy between the awareness of the impact on the
environment of the mode of mobility used and whether that actually affects users’ choices. While three out of four respondents (74.5%) are aware that driving by car contributes negatively to air pollution in Sarajevo, only very few (4.7%) take the environmental impact into consideration when choosing their mode of transport.
Choice of Transport Mode: • Most important criteria for the choice of transport mode are self-described as being
punctuality (69%), cleanliness (45.8%), reliability (43.2%), and safety (37.3%). • More than half of the surveyed Sarajevans (54.7%) state that they walk always or very
often when they need to go somewhere. The biggest motivation to walk more would be to have more green spaces, tree alleys, and resting places in the city
• Slightly less than every second respondent, 47.7% of Sarajevans, take public transport very often or always. There is a big potential for increasing this number, especially through better safety measures on buses and trams, a better quality of vehicles, and a faster arrival at the destination.
• Cycling currently is a very unpopular choice in Sarajevo, but six out of ten surveyed citizens said that they would be prompted to cycle more if it would become easier and safer. The most desired changes are infrastructure improvements (such as more bike lanes and more bike parking facilities), as well as safer behaviour of car drivers.
This survey is a contribution by SEE Change Net to the analysis phase for the development of a Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan (SUMP) for the City and the Canton of Sarajevo. The SUMP development takes place as part of the regional project “Sustainable Urban Mobility in SEE Countries II” (SUMSEEC II) under the Open Regional Fund for South-East Europe – Energy Efficiency (ORF-EE). The project is funded by the German Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) and is implemented by GIZ.
4
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................ 1
1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 5
1.1 About the Project ...................................................................................................................... 5
1.2 A Vision for Sarajevo in 2030 .................................................................................................... 5
1.3 Role of the Attitudinal Survey in the SUMP Development ........................................................ 5
1.4 Other Related Studies ............................................................................................................... 6
2 Methodology ....................................................................................................................... 7
2.1 Sample ...................................................................................................................................... 7
2.2 Survey Method ......................................................................................................................... 9
2.3. Advantages and Limitations of the Selected Survey Method ................................................... 9
2.4 Questionnaire Design .............................................................................................................. 10
3 Analysis and results ........................................................................................................... 12
3.1 Transport in Sarajevo .............................................................................................................. 12 3.1.1 Satisfaction with the Existing Mobility Options in Sarajevo ............................................................... 12 3.1.2 Key Aspects for Selection of Mobility Options .................................................................................. 13 3.1.3 Use of Different Mobility Options among Citizens of Sarajevo .......................................................... 14
3.2 Car as a Transport Mode ......................................................................................................... 19 3.2.1 Perceptions of a Car Use in Sarajevo ................................................................................................ 19
3.3 Public Transport as a Mode of Transport ................................................................................ 21 3.3.1 Perception of Using Public Transport in Sarajevo .............................................................................. 21 3.3.2 Motivation to Choose Public Transport More Often as a Transport Option ....................................... 24
3.4 Walking as Mobility Option .................................................................................................... 27 3.4.1 Perception of Walking in Sarajevo .................................................................................................... 27 3.4.2 Motivation for Choosing Walking More Frequently as Mobility Option ............................................. 29
3.5 Cycling as Mobility Option ...................................................................................................... 32 3.5.1 Perception of Cycling in Sarajevo ..................................................................................................... 32 3.5.2 Motivation for Choosing Cycling More Frequently as Mobility Option .............................................. 34
4 Conclusions........................................................................................................................ 37
4.1 Key conclusions ....................................................................................................................... 37
4.2 Recommendations for indicators in future research ............................................................... 38
Aneks I: Pojašnjenja na dodatna pitanja ............................................................................. 41
Aneks II: Uptinik ................................................................................................................... 43
Aneks III: Tabele ................................................................................................................... 51
5
1 Introduction 1.1 About the Project The Canton of Sarajevo and the City of Sarajevo are partners in the regional project “Sustainable Urban Mobility in SEE Countries II” (SUMSEEC II) under the Open Regional Fund for South-East Europe – Energy Efficiency (ORF-EE). The project is funded by the German Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) and is implemented by GIZ. It focuses on capacity building and technical support to capital cities in SEE in applying a sustainable approach to urban transport planning with special emphasis on the development of Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans (SUMP). A Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan (SUMP) is a strategic plan designed to satisfy the mobility needs of people and businesses in cities and their surroundings for a better quality of life. It builds on existing planning practices and takes due consideration of integration, participation, and evaluation principles. A SUMP puts forward an integrated set of technical, infrastructure, policy-based, and soft measures to improve performance and cost-effectiveness with regard to the declared goal and specific objectives. The European Union is also a strong advocate of the concept of SUMP and SUMSEEC II is using the similar methodology and guidelines, which will be adapted and applied to local contexts. SEE Change Net supports SUMSEEC II through improving capacities for the City and the Canton of Sarajevo on stakeholder engagement and participatory process.
1.2 A Vision for Sarajevo in 2030 The SUMP is based on the following vision for Sarajevo in 2030: "Sarajevo, open to the implementation of innovations in sustainable urban mobility, a place of safe and comfortable living, which breathes clean air and provides all citizens with a variety of mobility opportunities, accessible and affordable zero- and low-emission public transportation, and a wide range of opportunities for the intensive development of non-motorised movement." This SUMP vision statement has been adopted by the SUMP Coordination Group and its development has taken into consideration input from over 60 stakeholders from civil society, public institutions, academia, and public and private companies who participated in an interactive visioning workshop in July 2019. The vision serves as a crucial guiding element for the further SUMP planning process and provides the basis for subsequent more technical steps, such as the development of strategic objectives, of effective packages of measures, and of the implementation of selected interventions.
1.3 Role of the Attitudinal Survey in the SUMP Development The needs of the people should be at the heart of the SUMP development for the City and the Canton of Sarajevo. Involving citizens and stakeholders is crucial for gathering local knowledge
6
about mobility issues, in particular people’s needs, their values, their perceptions of problems, their priorities, and also their suggestions for solutions to existing problems. Ideally this increases public acceptance of the plan and minimises risks to decision-makers. Throughout the SUMP development, citizens and stakeholders in Sarajevo have the opportunity to get involved through a stakeholder workshop, a public panel discussion with experts, focus groups, 'Vox Pops' (Voice of People) as part of social media video clips, and more. Part of these participatory activities is a survey to explore the perceptions and attitudes among citizens of Sarajevo towards different modes of transport in order to gain insights into the motivations and potential of the future transition from cars to other modes of transport. The survey is based on the SUMP vision for Sarajevo in 2030, a preliminary analysis of key topics at the stakeholder workshop, and the strategic SUMP objectives as developed by the technical consultant team CEDES Consortium. The research methodology, analysis of results and conclusions relevant to the development of the SUMP are outlined in this report. The survey results feed into the analysis of the status quo and thus deliver valuable insights for the development of a comprehensive package of measures. The survey results also serve as data based on which later implemented focus groups with transport workers will be developed. This attitudinal study provides baseline data. If repeated over a longer time period during and after the implementation of SUMP measures, it will allow to measure the change in public perception of different modes of transport and thus provide an indicator for the success of the SUMP in Sarajevo.
1.4 Other Related Studies This attitudinal survey on urban mobility is conducted in a context where several other studies on public transportation, safety, air quality, good governance and other related topics are recently completed, currently ongoing, or soon to be implemented in Sarajevo/Bosnia and Herzegovina. These studies include, but are not limited to:
• Technical analysis of the existing urban mobility situation for the SUMP Sarajevo (produced by the CEDES Consortium within the SUMSEEC II project, implemented by GIZ and financed by the German Government);
• Public Transport Network Analysis (produced by PwC and ITP within the Good Governance Fund project “Public Transport Strategy for Canton Sarajevo”, financed by the UK Government);
• Public Opinion Poll (within the Good Governance Fund project “Public Transport Strategy for the Canton of Sarajevo”, financed by the UK Government);
• Public Transport Overview (Japan International Cooperation Agency - JICA); • Analysis as the foundation for the Green Canton Action Plan (European Bank for
Reconstruction and Development - EBRD); • IMPAQ project (funded by the Swedish International Development Cooperation
Agency - Sida; implemented by the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency - SEPA);
• “BALKAN BAROMETER 2019” (produced by the Regional Cooperation Council-RCC). To the best of the knowledge available during the design of the survey on citizens' perceptions and attitudes about urban mobility, this was complementary to the mentioned studies.
7
2 Methodology 2.1 Sample The survey was conducted on a representative sample of 500 adult respondents from Sarajevo Canton. The sampling frame was the 2013 Census in BiH. The sample is a two-stage, stratified random sample according to its technical characteristics and sampling principles. The sample was stratified by municipalities and type of settlements within the Sarajevo Canton and representative quotas by gender and age within the given municipalities. The first step in ensuring the randomness of the sample concerned the selection of the household by simple random selection of the household. Telephone numbers were dialled from the database of all landline numbers belonging to the Sarajevo Canton, using a generator to randomly select the numbers of phone. After selecting the number and contacting the household, the second stage involved selecting the respondents in the selected household according to the quota criterion. If we consider that the total population of Sarajevo is 438,443 inhabitants and that the sample of 500 respondents is representative, according to the formula for calculating the confidence interval, we obtain that the confidence interval is +/- 4.4. The confidence interval tells us the interval at which population parameters may deviate from the results obtained. The confidence level on the basis of which we calculated the confidence interval is 95%, which means that with 95% certainty we can claim that the results obtained on the selected sample could be generalized to the entire population of Sarajevo Canton, i.e. that a deviation from the obtained results is possible with a maximum of 4.4%, e.g. according to the calculated confidence interval with 95% certainty, we can say that if in our study 55% of respondents opted for a particular statement in the overall population, this statement would be chosen between 50.6% and 59.4% of respondents.
The sample given at the beginning of the survey was fully realized (you can see the results according to socio-demographic characteristics of the population in charts 1 to 8).
Chart 1: Distribution of respondents by gender Chart 2: Distribution of respondents by settlement type
86%
14%
Distribution of respondents by settlement type
Urban Rural
46%
54%
Distribution of respondents by genderMen Women
8
Chart 3: Distribution of respondents by age Chart 4: Distribution of respondents by level of education
Chart 5: Distribution of respondents by Chart 6: Distribution of respondents by economic socio-economic status status of household
Chart 7: Distribution of respondents by relief Chart 8: Distribution of respondents by municipalities
0.6
7.5
53.6
12.9
25.4
0 50 100
Not completed primaryschool
Completed primary school
High school degree
Higher school/collegedegree
Universitydegree/master/PhD
Distribution of respondents by level of education
1.7
16.3
65.3
16.7
0 50 100
It is hard, we cannot provideeven for most basic needs
We can provide only formost basic needs
We earn enough money, butwe cannot afford luxurious
things
We have enough money andwe can afford more
luxurious things
Distribution of respondents by economic status of household
20.4
19.2
16.6
18.6
25.3
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0
18 - 29 yrs old
30 - 39 yrs old
40 - 49 yrs old
50 - 59 yrs old
60 +
Distribution of respondents by age
44.3
15.4
8.8
4.4
27
0 20 40 60
Employed
Unemployed
Student
Housewife
Pensioner
Distribution of respondents by socio-economic status
Mostly hilly47%
Mostly flat53%
I don't know
Distribution of respondents by relief
9.2
13.6
16
28.5
15.8
6.4
4.6
0.4
5.6
0 20 40
Stari Grad
Centar
Novo Sarajevo
Novi Grad
Ilidža
Vogošča
Ilijaš
Trnovo
Hadžići
Distribution of respondents by municipalities
9
2.2 Survey Method The survey was conducted using the CATI (Computer Assisted Telephone Surveying) data collection method. CATI is a method of telephone interviewing, performed on a random sample. The survey was conducted by the Ipsos Agency from 3.10.-10.19.2019. The entire CATI process is fully automated: From selecting a phone number to entering data and checking the validity of the input, and the administration of the questionnaire is done by the interviewer via a computer-programmed questionnaire on the computer, allowing for a high degree of data entry control, as an instant entry of information entering directly a centralised base. Questionnaire administration was conducted at Ipsos Unique Call Center with the assistance of interviewers having years of experience and supervisors in charge of the work control process.
2.3. Advantages and Limitations of the Selected Survey Method The method used in the survey has many advantages: Complete control of interviewers is possible (all interviewers work from one space where there is a supervisor at all times who supervises the interviewing process and is in charge of solving all the problems that arise during the interview), collection of data is fast, the data can be reviewed during the data collection process, it is one of the cheaper/financially cost-effective methods of data collection, which was an important aspect when opting for the data collection method. However, in addition to many benefits of this data collection method, it also has some limitations. The first limitation is the length of the questionnaire, which should not exceed 15 minutes, in order for the respondent to have sufficient attention throughout the course of the survey. In addition to the length of the questionnaire, it was also necessary to adjust the questionnaire to the CATI survey method that does not allow too many responding options, because the respondent cannot remember the responding options given at the beginning of the question. Also, it was not possible to pre-set the sample according to the terrain of settlement, because there is no record of telephone numbers based on local community that could be used as reference points for the relief/terrain characteristics. We therefore decided to monitor the distribution of the respondent sample based on statements made by respondents during the survey process. The survey did not address a set of questions that capture modes of transport that are common to transportation research. A set of questions about modes of transport reveal the frequency of use of each mode of transport, the number of trips during a normal day, journey/travel purpose, average daily duration of the travel, etc. The decision not to include a set of questions about modes of transport was made primarily because the aim of the research was to determine users' perceptions of different modes of transport and the potential motives for more frequent use of public transport, bicycle and walking. By adding a set of questions about transport modes, it would significantly affect the extended duration of the questionnaire for more than 15 minutes, which would prevent the collection of quality data through a telephone survey.
10
Chart 9: Advantages and limitations of the telephone survey
2.4 Questionnaire Design The vision for Sarajevo in 2030, and related strategic SUMP objectives as developed by the technical consultant team CEDES Consortium, provide the direction for change in terms of values and desired features that the future urban mobility system should take into account. To facilitate this change, we wanted to build a better understanding about people's perceptions and attitudes that lead to the selection of a particular mode of transport. Also, the survey is intended to provide a baseline for similar SUMP-related assessments on changes in individual attitudes over time in the future.
The questionnaire prepared for this survey is available in the Annex. It consists of three sections, each aiming to obtain information to the following questions respectively: What mobility aspects are important to residents of Sarajevo when travelling? How do they perceive different existing mobility options? What would motivate them to change their mobility choices away from personal cars and towards more public transport, walking, and cycling? What role do the socio-demographic factors play in making mobility choices given the specific travel needs and possibilities?
The questionnaire was drafted by the SEE Change Net team, as a research holder, supported by the lead researcher, and then other parties have been consulted (the Consortium accountable for preparing SUMP for the Canton and the City of Sarajevo). The questionnaire was tested informally on a small group of people to find out the major flaws with the questions and wording and also to adjust its length to maximum 15 minutes. Finally, the questionnaire was sent to Ipsos for final testing after which minor adjustments were agreed.
The first section of the questionnaire has been designed to obtain information about the level of satisfaction of Sarajevo residents with their ability to move around Sarajevo to reach a desired destination (Q1) and to identify the three most important factors influencing their
Advantages
Control of interviewers
Data check during data collection
process
Duration of research
Price
Limitations
Length of the questionnaire -maximum 15
minutes
No longer responses to
questions
Phone records based on relief
structure
Set of questions on modes of
transport is not included
11
mobility choices. Reasons for choosing one mode of transport over another are determined by many factors. For the purpose of this survey a number of relevant factors, that can be described broadly as infrastructural/ physical/ service quality, socio-demographic, economic, psychological and environmental, were identified using transport- and SUMP-related literature (Q2). While more thorough analysis of travel patterns and behaviour goes beyond the purpose of this study (as explained further in the chapter on survey limitations), the first section included also a question about the frequency of use of different modes of transport (Q3) to provide insight about the most usual mode of transport used by survey participants and how it corresponds with their responses to other questions. The second section is divided in four sub-sections, each corresponding to one of the four mobility options (cars, public transport, walking and cycling) (Q4-Q12). The scope of each sub-section includes a set of questions developed to respond to two separate but complementary objectives. The first objective addressed the perceptions and attitudes of survey participants on a given mobility option and it asks respondents to state their level of (dis)agreement with the number of statements related to the environment, economic, infrastructure, service, information and traffic conditions that are relevant to the context of Sarajevo mobility. The second objective (for all modes of transport except cars) was to explore motivations: Survey participants were offered a list of five to seven possible improvements related to a given mobility option and asked to what extent would each of them encourage them to use it more frequently. Given the hypothetical character of these questions, the list of proposed improvements was refined to ensure that survey participants will likely be familiar with it and can relate to it. Subsections on cars and cycling include also a question about the ownership of car or bike by a household.
The third section focuses on socio-demographic factors that may significantly affect travel needs and possibilities and play an important role in the choice of means of transport. They include family status and household composition, their socio-economic and employment status, financial abilities and the educational level. Additionally, participants were asked about the topography of their place of residence (e.g. predominantly hilly or flat).
12
3 Analysis and results 3.1 Transport in Sarajevo
3.1.1 Satisfaction with the Existing Mobility Options in Sarajevo
The data obtained from the conducted survey indicate that the citizens of Sarajevo are moderately satisfied with the mobility, i.e. their ability to move around the city when they want or need to. Namely, while 45.3% of Sarajevo citizens surveyed are partially or fully satisfied with their mobility, almost one third of citizens (31.8%) is partially or completely dissatisfied. The share of those who are undecided or those who say they are neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with mobility in the city is not negligible - 22.9% of respondents opted for this answer (Chart 8).
Chart 8: Satisfaction with mobility in Sarajevo (in %)
Considering the age of the respondents, the oldest citizens of Sarajevo (65 years of age and over) present the majority of those who are fully satisfied with mobility in the city - as much as 18.9%, which is well above the average for the total population surveyed (7.8%). The educational level of the respondents is also related to their satisfaction with the mobility possibilities in Sarajevo. This connection is especially visible when looking at respondents with a college degree. In this category, more than one third (35.7%) are satisfied with mobility in the city, which is significantly higher than in other educational categories or compared to the average for the whole sample. Significant differences are also observed when looking at the socio-economic status of respondents. While among the employed respondents those who state that are completely satisfied with the mobility in Sarajevo (only 3.9%) are below-average represented, this category of respondents houses also the highest number of those who are dissatisfied with the mobility (29.8% of the employed respondents). On the other hand, among retirees there is above-average representation of those who are completely satisfied with the possibility of moving around the city (13.7%), and below-average representation of those who are dissatisfied with mobility (11.8%).
13
The gender of the respondents, the type of settlement in which they live, the socioeconomic status of the household, as well as whether they have children under the age of 19 are not variables that are sufficiently strong statistically correlated with satisfaction of the ability to move around Sarajevo.
3.1.2 Key Aspects for Selection of Mobility Options
One of the very important segments of the survey concerned the aspects that are important for the citizens of Sarajevo when choosing the mode of transportation. The survey sought to determine whether and to what extent the Sarajevo residents consider the following aspects when making a choice about transportation mode: reliability, punctuality, availability of relevant information (routes, schedules, costs), accessibility and cleanliness of transport means, cost of using it, the time it takes to reach the destination, but also privacy and possibility of social interaction and especially important, the impact on the environment.
Table 9: What affects the mobility choices of the Sarajevo citizens? (in %)
Dimension % respondents
Punctuality 69.1
Cleanliness 45.8
Reliability 43.2
Safety 37.3
Needed time to get to destination 25.8
Comfort 20.8
Availability of information about schedule, routes and cost
15.6
Cost 13.8
Accessibility 11.6
Flexibility (in terms of routing, duration of travel)
7.1
Environmental impact 4.7
Privacy 3.8
Social interaction 1.3
The data presented in Table 9 clearly indicate that for Sarajevo citizens covered by the survey, when choosing the mode of transportation, punctuality is a key criterion they consider. For as many as 69.1% of the respondents it is very important that the travel schedules are respected, that the transport is not late and that they can arrive at the desired destination on time. On the
14
second place is the vehicle cleanliness, which is stated by 45.8% of respondents, the third is reliability (43.2%), and the fourth place is the subjective sense of safety when using a certain transport option (37.3%). Vehicle hygiene, or cleanliness, was especially emphasised by the older respondents, i.e. those aged 65 or over (59.9%), while safety was particularly important to those who stated that their household only had the resources for the most basic needs (51.7%).
About a quarter of Sarajevo citizens (25.8%) said that the time it takes to reach their destination is one of the important factors that influence their selection of the mode of transport, while about a fifth (20.8%) also take into account how comfortable a particular mode of transportation is. Only in the category of respondents who have the highest level of education (university degree, Master’s or doctoral studies) are below average represented those who emphasise comfort as an important aspect when choosing transportation (12.6%).
On the other hand, in the case of the surveyed Sarajevo citizens, the possibility of social interaction was of the least importance for choosing the mode of transport (only 1.3%). In addition, it is not important for the citizens of Sarajevo whether they will have sufficient privacy when using a certain mode of transport - only 3.8% of the respondents, among other things, emphasised the importance of this dimension. However, it is very worrying that only 4.7% of respondents singled out the environmental impact of a particular mode of transport as one of the key criteria they will consider when choosing a transportation option. Only among the respondents with the highest level of education are above-average those who think of the environment when choosing the mode of transport (8.2%), although this share is still very low. Finally, even with the residents of Sarajevo, flexibility (for example, the ability to adjust the route) is not highly ranked when it comes to choosing the mode of transport (7.1%). Only in the case of the youngest respondents, i.e. respondents between the age of 18 and 29, is flexibility above average important when choosing how to reach the desired destination (14.4%).
3.1.3 Use of Different Mobility Options among Citizens of Sarajevo
As mentioned in the section on the advantages and limitations of the research method (Chapter 2.3), the primary objective of the research was not to identify modalities of movement (number of trips, purpose of movement, distance, time duration, etc.), but to examine the views of Sarajevo citizens on the use of different modes of transport, as well as their motivation to move from cars to more frequent use of other means of transport. Accordingly, the respondents were asked only the general question about the frequency of use of different transport options, without taking into account the distance, travel time and other similar aspects, assuming that it is possible to determine the general habits of citizens' movements in this way4.
There are significant differences in the frequency of use of different modes of transport by Sarajevo citizens (Table 10).
4 A more detailed analysis of each transport option could be the subject of some following survey.
15
Table 10: Frequency in use of different modes of transport (in %)
Always Very often Sometimes Rarely Never
Car as a driver 23.3% 16.1% 12.2% 10.6% 37.9%
Car as a passenger 6.1% 24.2% 29.8% 27.4% 12.4%
Public transport 26.4% 21.3% 18.1% 21.6% 12.6%
Walking 23.6% 31.1% 22.8% 18.2% 4.4%
Cycling 0.4% 4.4% 10.4% 11.7% 73.1%
3.1.3.1 Car When it comes to car use frequency, around two fifths of the respondents (39.4%) state they always or very often use this transport option as a driver, while 30.3% of respondents always or very often travel by car as a passenger (when someone else drives). On the other hand, 37.9% of the Sarajevo citizens never drive a car, and 12.4% never travel by car as a passenger. The data indicate that gender differences are very pronounced when considering the frequency of using a car as a mean of transport. As many as 37.4% of men say that driving is the type of transportation they always use, while in case of women, this proportion is far lower, 11.1%. In contrast, the proportion of women who say they never drive a car is significantly higher (52.6%) than men who never drive (20.7%). The proportion of men who never travel by car as a passenger is twice that of women (17% of men versus 8.5% of women), and the proportion of male respondents who rarely travel by car as passengers in a car driven by someone else is also significantly higher than the share of women (40.7% men vs. 16% women).
Chart 11: Share of male and female respondents who always drive a car and those who never drive a car (in %)
When looking at those who always use a car as drivers themselves as a transport option, it is observed that respondents from 30 to 45 years of age (36.6%), rural residents (35.1%), respondents who have employment (40.4%) as well as those who estimate that the socio-
16
economic position of their household is high5 (35.1%) are represented above average. By contrast, among those who always drive a car, respondents aged 65 or over (8.9%), respondents stating that their household only has resources for the most basic needs (10.5%), students (4.4%), pensioners (8.7) %), as well as residents of downtown Sarajevo (10.9%) are below-average represented.
The use of the car as a mean of transport is closely linked to whether the household owns the car at all. Of all Sarajevo citizens surveyed, 23% said their household did not own a car. More than half of citizens say that not only does their household own a car, but they also drive it in person (53.5%), 18.6% are unable to drive a car they own because they do not have a driver's license, while 4.9% of respondents stated that despite being drivers, they do not drive a car owned by the household (Chart 12).
Chart 12: Household car ownership (in %)
The gender differences in the frequency of car use presented are directly related to the differences in car ownership. Survey data show that if the household owns a car, the proportion of men who drive a car is twice that of women (73.2% of men versus 36.6% of women). In addition, the proportion of women who do not drive a household car because they do not have a driver's license is many times higher than the same proportion of men (29.4% women vs. 6% men).
Among the oldest respondents (65 years or older), those who drive a car owned by the household are below average represented (31.1%), and above average those who say that their household does not own a car at all (48.5%). More than the average of those living in households without a car are the respondents stating that they can afford to meet only for the most basic needs (57.3%), among pensioners (47.7%), as well as among those whose households have no minor children (29.3%). Residents of rural areas are much less likely than residents of urban areas, but also in relation to the total population surveyed, to state that their household does not own a car (only 6.1%). This finding can be interpreted in the light of lower accessibility of other transport options in rural areas (such as public transport) and the greater
5 Respondents who stated that their household members “have enough money and can afford more luxurious things“.
53.5
18.6
4.9
23
Yes and I drive it
Yes, but I do not drive it as I am notdriver
Yes, but although driver, I do not driveit
No, our household does not own car
17
distance needed to reach certain destinations, which makes it more challenging to find an alternative to the automotive mode of transport.
3.1.3.2 Public transport More than a quarter of Sarajevo citizens who took part in the survey state that when they need to arrive to a particular destination, they always use public transport. Adding to this that more than one fifth of citizens use this mode of transport often (21.3%), it can be concluded that almost half of Sarajevo citizens (47.7%) use public transport frequently. On the other hand, just over a fifth of respondents (21.6%) rarely use public transport. However, the number of those who do not use this mode of transport at all (12.6%) is not negligible. Only occasionally does 18.1% of Sarajevo citizens surveyed use public transport.
Chart 13: Frequency of public transport use (in %)
Among those who say they never use public transportation, significant gender differences are observed. While in the case of men, the proportion of those who do not use this mode of transport is almost one fifth of all male respondents (19.3%), among female respondents there are only 6.7% of those who never use public transport.
Among those aged 30-45, then among those from households with high socio-economic status, as well as among employed respondents, those who never use public transport were above average (19.1%, 20.6%, and 19.4%, respectively). It should be borne in mind that precisely in these categories of respondents there are above average those who stated that they always use the car as a means of transport (as a driver), which may be related to the reduced use of public transport. Finally, it should be noted that among respondents from the city centre there are significantly more respondents stating that they rarely travel by public transport (33.5%), compared to respondents from other parts of Sarajevo, as well as compared to the average for the entire surveyed population.
3.1.3.3 Walking In order to reach the desired destination, almost a quarter of Sarajevo citizens surveyed (23.6%) state that walking is always their choice, while almost a third of respondents very often walks
18
(31.1%). On the other hand, 18.2% of Sarajevo citizens rarely walk, and there are some who say they never walk to their desired destination (4.4%)6.
Chart 14: Walking frequency (in %)
Interesting is the finding that walking frequency is not related to almost any of the socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents. The exception is the level of education, only when looking at those respondents who say that they walk very often - such respondents are above average in the category of those with higher education (40.4%), and below average respondents with high school graduation (24.3%). In addition, there are significantly more respondents from the central part of Sarajevo who always walk to reach their destination (39.2%), which is not surprising given that it can be assumed that the distance they need to travel is smaller compared to residents of other parts of Sarajevo.
Regardless of the distances not covered by this survey, information on the number of respondents who always or frequently walk to their destination should be taken as an important indicator of preferences as well as general conditions for walking in Sarajevo. Namely, unlike many other cities, Sarajevo has a compact city centre, which is often less than 10 minutes to reach the desired destination. In addition, it should be noted that walking is often combined with public and other modes of transport, and therefore city residents are almost never just pedestrians or just car drivers, but their actual movement patterns are much more complicated.7
3.1.3.4 Cycling Only 0.4% of respondents say that when choosing the mode of transportation to their desired destination, they always opt for cycling. The share of Sarajevo citizens who very often use the bicycle as a means of transportation is very small (4.4%), and the proportion of respondents
6 Some future analysis would need to check whether those who say they never walk to their destination are those who are unable to do so for objective reasons (say, due to disability, impaired movement, etc.) and what is the proportion of such population. 7 The purpose of this research was not to determine the modalities of movement (number of trips, purpose of movement, distance, time duration, etc.), but to examine the views of Sarajevo citizens on the use of different modes of transport, as well as their motivation to switch from cars to more frequent use of other transport modes.
19
who only occasionally ride a bicycle to reach a certain destination is not significantly higher - about one tenth of all citizens surveyed (10.4%). In contrast, as many as 73.1% of respondents say they never use a bicycle as a means of transportation.
Chart 15: Frequency of cycling (in %)
When looking at specific categories of respondents, it is not surprising that among the oldest citizens (age 65 or older), as well as pensioners, are above average represented those who never ride a bicycle (91% and 88.9%, respectively). On the other hand, in the youngest category of respondents (18 to 29 years) there are below average those who never ride a bicycle. However, even in this age category, more than half of the respondents never choose to ride a bicycle as a transport option (51.7%). When it comes to differences in place of residence, the lowest number of citizens living in the municipality of Novi Grad stated that they very often use a bicycle as a means of transport (only 0.6%).
3.2 Car as a Transport Mode
3.2.1 Perceptions of a Car Use in Sarajevo
When it comes to the attitudes of the surveyed citizens of Sarajevo on the use of cars, it can be observed that the respondents are very aware of certain rules that must be followed in order to ensure the safety of all traffic participants. An extremely high proportion of Sarajevo citizens stated that they always slow down near pedestrian crossings and give advantage to pedestrians (95.6%), and that they actively look after cyclists when driving (94.1%). In addition, as many as 94.7% of citizens support the implementation of strict safety regulations and measures, such as speed limits to reduce the number of traffic accidents.
On the other hand, it is clear that there is a lot of work to be done to change certain habits and attitudes of Sarajevo citizens regarding car safety when it comes to minimising the risk of unintended consequences, including those with a fatal outcome. This is supported by the fact that over half of the surveyed citizens (54%) state that, when driving a car, passengers in the back seat of their car do not always use a seat belt. In addition, over a fifth of respondents (22%) admit they sometimes use their phone to text or talk while driving. The behaviour of other
20
drivers is also very important to consider, both from a safety and social interaction point of view. The data relating to the perception of the behaviour of other drivers by respondents is very worrying. Namely, as many as 68.3% of Sarajevo citizens surveyed believe that other drivers do not show safe and decent traffic behaviour.
As the above data indicate that, on the one hand, the respondents themselves do not sufficiently take into account all the important safety aspects of driving a car, and on the other hand, they estimate that other drivers who are involved in traffic do not have a well-developed culture of traffic behaviour, it is not surprising that over a quarter of Sarajevo citizens (25.9%) do not feel safe when driving.
Chart 16: Perceptions of a car use in Sarajevo (in %)
Finding a place to park a car easily is closely linked to a number of different aspects of using this mode of transport, primarily accessibility. However, the ability to easily find a parking space is directly related to the time it takes to arrive at a particular destination, as well as the flexibility that car users can have (for example, how car users can coordinate different obligations throughout the day if this involves going to more locations in the city). The availability of information about available parking spaces is something that can help car users find parking spaces or direct them to use another (more environmentally friendly) mode of transportation.
10
13.9
21.9
35.7
49.7
49.8
74.4
94.2
94.7
95.6
9.1
17.8
6.4
10.3
14.2
24.3
11.5
1.8
2.2
1
80.9
68.3
71.6
54
36.1
25.9
14
4.1
3.1
3.4
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%100%
It is easy to find parking.
Other drivers show safe and decent driving behavior.
Sometimes I text or make a call while I driving.
Passengers in the backseat always wear a seatbeltwhen I drive.
I consider service, tax, insurance, and parking costswhen I decide whether to drive a car or use other
transportation modes.
I feel safe when driving.
I think driving makes air pollution in Sarajevoworse.
I actively watch out for cyclists when I drive.
I support the enforcement of strict safety regulationsand measures, such as speed limits, to reduce the
number of traffic crashes.
I always slow down or give way to pedestrians atpedesrian crossings.
Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree
21
Sarajevo residents surveyed generally state that parking is difficult to find in this city (80.9%), while one tenth of respondents consider the parking place is easy to find.
From the point of view of the cost-effectiveness of using a car, almost half of the respondents (49.7%) state that they consider the cost of service, taxes, gasoline, insurance, and parking when deciding whether to use a car or other modes of transport. However, more than a third of Sarajevo citizens (36.1%) will not consider the financial aspect when deciding whether to use an alternative means of transport. The environmental consequences of car overuse can be extremely negative. The price paid by the population in areas with high levels of air pollution far outweighs the financial aspects because it disrupts what is most important, which is human health. Although the fact that almost three quarters of Sarajevo citizens surveyed (74.5%) are aware of the fact that car driving further contributes to air pollution in Sarajevo is encouraging, the share of citizens who think that car driving has no negative effects on air quality is by no means negligible and amounts to 14%. Also, the data presented earlier (Chapter 3.1.2) show that, unfortunately, for an extremely small proportion of respondents (4.7%), environmental impact is one of the key criteria to consider when choosing a means of transport.
• Over a quarter of surveyed citizens (25.9%) do not feel safe when driving. • Sarajevo citizens are aware of some, but not all, security risks associated with car
use. • 95.6% of respondents say they always slow down near pedestrian crossings and give
pedestrians advantage, 94.1% state they take active care of cyclists while driving, and 94.7% of citizens support the implementation of strict safety regulations and measures.
• What is worrying is that 54% of respondents say that when driving a car, passengers in the back seat of their car do not always use a seat belt and 22% of respondents state they sometimes use the phone to text or talk while driving.
• As many as 68.3% of Sarajevo citizens surveyed believe that other drivers do not demonstrate safe and decent traffic behaviour.
• Four fifths of respondents say that parking is difficult to find in Sarajevo and half of surveyed citizens takes account of financial costs when opting for car use.
• 74.5% of respondents are aware of the fact that driving a car significantly contributes to the air pollution in Sarajevo.
3.3 Public Transport as a Mode of Transport
3.3.1 Perception of Using Public Transport in Sarajevo
Survey data indicate that Sarajevo citizens are most satisfied with accessibility of public transport, especially bus stops coverage, and most dissatisfied with the cleanliness and maintenance of public transport vehicles (Chart 17)8. The cleanliness of the vehicles,
8 All the respondents included in the sample who answered the questions asked were taken into account, not just those who actively use public transport as a means of transport. Given that almost all of the questions raised were related to attitudes rather than personal experience of using public transport, the starting assumption was that every Sarajevo citizen could have an opinion on different aspects of using this mode of transport (e.g., safety, accessibility, comfort, etc.), regardless of the reason for not using it. Specifically, citizens' attitudes can also point to the reasons for not using public transport as a transport option, and provide guidance for improving specific aspects of the use
22
according to the respondents, is the second most important criterion that they consider when choosing a means of transport (Chapter 3.2) and therefore it is very important to pay special attention to the improvement of the situation in this aspect.
As many as 88.8% of the respondents stated that there are public transports nearby that they can use, that is, the basic condition for accessibility of public transport is fulfilled. In addition, almost three quarters of Sarajevo citizens surveyed (74.3%) point out that, in most cases, they can reach their desired destination by public transport, reflecting both the flexibility and accessibility of public transport. However, there are some differences in the proportion of citizens who disagree with the statement that public transport can reach the destination they would like in relation to the type of settlement in which they live. While respondents living in predominantly flat parts of Sarajevo are above average satisfied with the possibility of arriving at their desired destination by public transport (only 9.5% of respondents are dissatisfied), respondents residing in predominantly hilly parts of Sarajevo are above average dissatisfied with this aspect of using public transport.
Chart 18: Attitude of citizens on use of public transport in Sarajevo (in %)
A large share of respondents also positively assessed the cost-effectiveness of public transport - as many as 72.1% of citizens agree with the statement that public transport in Sarajevo is affordable to use, i.e. that the costs of using this mode of transport are not too high. It is important to emphasise that retirees are part of the population most satisfied with the cost-effectiveness of public transport in Sarajevo - as many as 87.9% of this category of respondents
of this means of transport. It is also important to note that for each question there was an "I don't know" option and all respondents who selected this option were excluded from the analysis.
15.5
23.6
35.4
41.7
55.3
72.1
74.3
88.8
17.6
19.3
19.3
14.7
15.2
12.8
11.4
4.2
67
57
45.2
43.6
29.5
15.1
14.3
6.9
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Publictransportvehicles(buses,trams)arecleanandwellmaintained.
Onpublictransport,thereisenoughroomforallpassengers.
Publictransportisreliableanditallowsmetogettodestinationatdesiredtime.
Itiseasyformetogetup-to-dateinformationaboutfares,routesandschedules.
Ifeelsafewhenusingpublictransport.
Itiscost-effectivetousepublictransport.
InmostcasesIcangotodesireddestinationbypublictransport.
ThereispublictransportnearwhereIlive.
Agree Neitheragreenordisagree Disagree
23
are fully or partially satisfied with the cost aspect of using public transport. Such a result is not surprising, given that pensioners are one of the categories of population that pays for the use of public transport at a discounted price or does not pay the ticket at all (depending on age).
In contrast, only 15.5% of Sarajevo citizens surveyed are partially or fully satisfied with the cleanliness and maintenance of public transport vehicles (buses, trams), while over two thirds of citizens (67%) are dissatisfied with this aspect. Among the youngest category of respondents, as well as among those with higher education, the fewest number of respondents stated that they were satisfied with the cleanliness and maintenance of public transport vehicles.
Another important aspect relates to the comfort of using public transport. Although the previously presented information on the cleanliness and proper maintenance of public transport vehicles is to some extent related to the comfort of this mode of transport, this aspect is even more closely related to whether there is sufficient space for all passengers in public transport vehicles. The data indicate that the comfort of using public transport is one of the negative aspects, as only 23.6% of the respondents partially or completely agree with the statement that there is enough space in public transport for all passengers, while as many as 57% disagree with this statement.
It is important to note that a large number of passengers in vehicles is not only related to comfort, but is also significant from the aspect of passenger safety in vehicles, as there are greater passenger overloads and safety risks. Of course, the safety of passengers in vehicles is also linked to many other factors, such as whether the vehicles are in good working order and whether the drivers are adequately managing the vehicles, are the passengers exposed to various forms of violence, both by other passengers and by drivers and conductors, is there a widespread occurrence of pickpocketing and other criminal acts, and the like. Although over half of Sarajevo citizens surveyed indicated that they felt partially or fully safe when using public transport (55.3%), as many as 29.5% felt insecure, indicating that measures should be taken to ensure passenger safety when using this mode of transportation to significantly improve it.
Finally, it is very important both how reliable public transport is and whether the time it takes to reach the destination is in accordance with the scheduled time (without delay), and the extent to which public transport information is available (fare information, routes, schedules, and the like). For respondents, reliability is ranked third in the list of criteria for choosing a mode of transport (Chapter 3.2). Only 35.4% of Sarajevo citizens surveyed believe that public transport is reliable, so that they can reach their destination at the desired time, and as many as 45.2% have the opposite opinion. However, the biggest differences in the perception of the reliability of public transport in Sarajevo are observed when taking into account the age of the respondents. While among the oldest respondents, above-average respondents believe that public transport in Sarajevo is reliable and can arrive at their desired destination at the scheduled time), among the respondents from the youngest age group are the least of those who think they can rely on public transportation to get to the destination they want in time. It can be assumed that the needs of the two age categories for mobility are generally different, so it is more important for younger respondents to have public transport available whenever they need it and that they can really trust that they will arrive at time they want or need, while the oldest respondents give less importance to this aspect.
The prerequisite for assessing the reliability of public transport is precisely that information is available on the various aspects of its use, primarily on the timetable and route of the vehicle.
24
In this case, similarly, more Sarajevo citizens’ surveyed state that the necessary information on the use of public transport, cannot be easily obtained, compared to the share of those who consider such information is easy to access.
• The citizens of Sarajevo are most satisfied with the accessibility of public transport in their places of residence, and are most dissatisfied with the cleanliness and maintenance of public transport vehicles.
• As many as 88.8% of respondents indicated that there is public transport available near their place of residence. In contrast, only 15.5% of Sarajevo citizens are satisfied with the cleanliness and maintenance of public transport vehicles.
• The cost-effectiveness of public transport is highly rated by citizens - 72.1% of citizens are considering use public transport affordable.
• Comfort of using public transport is one of the negative aspects, as only 23.6% of the respondents think that there is enough space for all passengers in public transport vehicles.
• Although just over half of the respondents indicated that they felt partially or fully safe when using public transport (55.3%), as many as 29.5% felt unsafe.
• Only 35.4% of Sarajevo citizens surveyed believe that public transportation is reliable, so that they can reach their destination at the desired time, and approximately two-fifths of respondents (41.7%) think that relatively easy access to public transport information can be obtained.
3.3.2 Motivation to Choose Public Transport More Often as a Transport Option
Considering the above-mentioned views of the citizens of Sarajevo covered by the survey regarding different aspects of using public transport, it might be somewhat assumed what motivates citizens to use public transport more. The participating citizens had the opportunity to rate (grades 1 to 5) various potential improvements that would make them more motivated to use this mode of transport more often (Table 19).
Table 19: Motivation of Sarajevo citizens to use public transport more as a transport option – average marks for the statements offered
Statement Average mark
Better safety measures on buses/trams against pick pocketing and bullying)
4.31
Better quality of vehicles (e.g. heating, cooling, hygiene, more free seats) 4.30
Faster arrival at destination, for instance through enforced priority lanes for public transit on the roads; bus-priority traffic signals; etc. (yellow lanes and priority at crossroads).
4.26
Reliable timetable and better and more adequate transport routes (e.g. better line connection) 4.23
25
More accessible vehicles (for example, making it easier to get on the tram with a stroller or wheelchair) 4.19
Simple and readily available information about arrivals of bus/tram 4.18
Public transport available near where I live 3.94
Although safety was not the worst-rated aspect of public transport use by Sarajevo citizens who participated in the survey, better security measures in buses and trams, such as protection against bullies, pickpockets and the like, are what would most motivate respondents to use more public transport - the average grade given by the respondents is 4.31. Gender differences in the importance of safety in increasing the use of public transport are very pronounced, with women being significantly more motivated to use this transportation option more than men. In evaluating the motivation for using public transport, an above-average proportion of employed respondents, as well as respondents whose primary transportation option is car driving, indicated that better safety measures would not (sufficiently) motivate them to use public transport.
Immediately after increased safety, the next most important motivator for increasing public transport use is improved vehicle quality in a general sense, which also includes aspects of vehicle cleanliness and maintenance, as well as driving comfort in public transport vehicles. The respondents rated the quality of the vehicle as a potential factor for increased use of public transport 4.30. As with safety, men also gave the lowest rating more often than women, or more often stated that better vehicle quality would not motivate them to use public transport more often. In addition, better quality of vehicles would not at all motivate 15.5% of those for who drive car as the primary transportation option, to start using public transport to a greater extent, which is significantly higher than the average for respondents who most commonly use other modes of transport.
Third in importance for increasing the motivation for more frequent use of public transport is taking measures to reach destinations more quickly, such as enforcing a yellow lane system and giving priority to public transport vehicles at intersections - average score 4.26. The female part of the population would be more motivated to use public transport than the male population. Getting to the destination faster would be the least motivating for respondents with the highest socio-economic status, who gave this aspect an average score of 3.9. It may be assumed that some other aspects are more important to this part of the population or that they have the opportunity to use alternative transport options to arrive at the desired destination in the shortest possible time (for example, taxi or private car). As expected, respondents for whom car driving is the primary transportation option would be least motivated by reducing the time required to arrive at their desired destination, while respondents who already use public transportation most often would be most motivated to further increase the frequency of use of this mode of transport if it were to arrive at the destination in less time). When it comes to the part of the city where they live, shorter travel times by public transport would most motivate the residents of Novi Grad and the least residents of Vogošća to use this mode of transport more frequently.
As a motivating factor on the fourth place, is a reliable timetable and more adequate public transport routes (for example, better connection of lines), to which the respondents gave an average score of 4.23. For women, this factor is also a greater motivator for the use of public
26
transport than for men. In addition, in the case of increasing the reliability and adequacy of public transport routes, respondents using a car as a basic mode of transport would be less motivated than other respondents, and especially than those who primarily use public transport.
According to the respondents, the next most important factor is to increase the physical accessibility of urban transport vehicles, especially for those categories of citizens who particularly rely on unhindered movement, so that they can be equal participants in not only transportation but also social life. It primarily refers to people with disabilities (especially those who use wheelchairs and other mobility aids), but also to children, the elderly, and anyone who has difficulty moving for any reason. Respondents gave an average score of 4.19 to the improvement in this aspect. This aspect was slightly less important for those who primarily get around by car (average grade 4). In addition, men gave an average score of 3.9, while the women surveyed gave an average score of 4.4. Although this difference does not deviate significantly from the existing gender differences in the aforementioned aspects, it can be assumed that it is especially important for women for public transport vehicles to be physically accessible, since they are the ones who are more likely to care for other dependent household members (children, the elderly, people with disabilities). Because they are significantly less likely than men to be car drivers, women are more reliant on public transport and therefore care more about improving it.
On the sixth place, as a motivating factor for increased use of public transport, is easy and fast access to information on bus and tram arrivals - average rating 4.18. While women and public transport users would be above-average motivated to increase use of this mode of transport, if vehicle arrival information were readily and quickly accessible, men and those most often driving the car would be below-average motivated with such a change. Interestingly, residents of Vogošć a would be least motivated by the introduction of innovations regarding the availability of bus and tram arrival information (average grade 3.6).
The last place on the list of motivating factors for public transportation is occupied by the public transport lines coverage in relation to the place where the respondents live - average rating 3.94. Such a finding is not surprising, given the citizens' views on the current state of urban transport, where accessibility/coverage has been best evaluated. It can be assumed that the current coverage of public transport (public transport lines and stops) is satisfactory, and that this is not an aspect whose improvement would particularly motivate the citizens of Sarajevo to increase the use of public transport. Only the residents of Vogošća in this case also give a significantly lower rating of better accessibility of public transport in the place of residence as a motivating factor, compared to respondents living in other parts of Sarajevo (the average rating given by respondents from Vogošća is 3.4).
• Better safety measures in buses and trams are what would motivate the respondents to use public transport most - the average grade given by the respondents is 4.31 (out of a maximum of 5). The lowest rated motivation factor for more frequent use of public transport is the coverage of the place where respondents live by public transport to whom respondents give - average grade 3.94.
• Better quality vehicles would greatly contribute to more frequent use of public transport (average grade 4.30), as well as introducing measures to reach destinations more quickly, such as the yellow lane system or prioritizing public transport vehicles at intersections (grade 4.26).
27
• Having a reliable timetable and a more adequate public transport route would also quite motivate citizens to take more public transport (grade 4.23).
• The motivation of Sarajevo citizens to use public transport more frequently could be increased if vehicles were more accessible to disabled people, children, the elderly, as well as all those with difficulty (average rating 4.19), but also if arrival information vehicles were easily and quickly accessible (rating 4.18).
• In almost all respects, men and car drivers would be below-average motivated to use public transportation, while women, and often those already predominantly using public transportation, would be above-average motivated by potential advancements.
3.4 Walking as Mobility Option
3.4.1 Perception of Walking in Sarajevo
According to the survey data, there is not even one aspect of walking as a mode of transport in Sarajevo that at least half of the respondents were satisfied with (Chart 20). Of all the aspects of walking that were in the focus of the survey, the respondents rated positively the presence of pedestrian resting places (such as benches), which is primarily related to accessibility, but also to flexibility of this form of mobility. Slightly less than half of Sarajevo citizens surveyed (47.1%) indicated that they partially or fully agree that pedestrians in Sarajevo have enough resting places, while 37.4% said they do not. Among respondents aged 18 to 29, as well as among those in households with children aged 7 to 19 years, below average represented are those who were dissatisfied with the coverage of places intended for rest. On the other hand, the residents of Stari Grad are the most dissatisfied, that is, they much more often than other respondents, stated that pedestrians in Sarajevo do not have enough places to rest while walking (60.1%).
In addition to benches or similar resting places, for accessibility and comfort of walking, it is also very important whether there are enough greenery and tree alleys to provide pedestrians with sun protection. More generally, the distribution of greenery is also very important from an environmental point of view, primarily air quality. The absence of a sufficient amount of green space and tree alleys can leave long-term negative effects on the environment as well as on the population. Less than two fifths of respondents (38.8%) believe that there are enough greenery and tree alleys to provide pedestrians with a shelter from the sun, while more people disagree (44.7%). It is interesting that respondents with higher education are particularly dissatisfied, as more than half of these respondents believe that there are currently not enough tree alleys and green spaces in Sarajevo.
28
Chart 20: Perceptions of walking as mobility option in Sarajevo (in %)
The greatest dissatisfaction for citizens of Sarajevo is caused by improper and threatening parking of cars, which is another aspect closely related to pedestrian accessibility and safety. Only about one tenth of respondents (9.9%) agree with the statement that cars are parked properly and in a way that does not obstruct pedestrians to their destination, and as many as four fifths (80.2%) of respondents disagree with this statement. While men above average say that cars in Sarajevo are properly parked so that they do not interfere with pedestrian movement (15.1%), only 5.4% of the female population agrees with this statement. When interpreting this finding, it should be borne in mind that men are significantly more likely to be car drivers, so it is important for some respondents to consider how much they are able to be truly objective.
Pedestrian safety can also be compromised by the behaviour of other participants in traffic, especially car drivers and other motor vehicles. Only one fifth of respondents (20.3%) believe that drivers are sufficiently aware of pedestrians and take care of them while driving, and as many as 57.4% think that drivers are not careful enough about pedestrians. In this case, too, differences are expressed only with respect to the gender of the respondents, and only when looking at those who disagree with the statement that car drivers take sufficient care of the pedestrians. Women are above average dissatisfied with the behaviour of drivers, while men are below average dissatisfied with this aspect.
Sidewalk condition is another aspect that is primarily related to pedestrian safety, but also to the comfort and reliability of this type of mobility. It can be expected that if the sidewalks are in good condition, if they are of sufficient width and without obstacles that would hinder walking, the citizens of Sarajevo would be inclined to more likely opt for this mode of mobility. Survey data indicate that the condition of sidewalks is another aspect that needs improvement, as only
9.9
20.3
27.5
38.3
38.8
47.1
9.9
22.3
27
20.8
16.4
15.5
80.2
57.4
45.5
40.8
44.7
37.4
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Carsareparkedinawaythatmakesiteasyforpedestrianstowalkwheretheyneedtogo.
Drivershaveenoughawarenessforpedestriansandwatchoutforthem.
Sidewalksareinagoodcondition.
Ifeelsafewhenbeingapedestrian.
Thereisenoughgreeneryandtreealleysprovidingshadeforpedestriansonsunnydays.
Pedestrianshaveenoughplacestorest(e.g.benches).
Agree Neitheragreenordisagree Disagree
29
27.5% of respondents believe that sidewalks are in good condition, while as many as 45.5% think otherwise. In this case, men are above average satisfied with the sidewalk condition, while women are below average satisfied with this aspect. On the other hand, the residents of Stari Grad are most dissatisfied with the condition of the sidewalks (even 72.8%).
With above mentioned data in mind, it is not surprising that only 38.3% of Sarajevo citizens surveyed feel safe when walking. Of course, the physical environment and behaviour of drivers are not the only factors affecting a pedestrian's sense of safety, but it is also closely related to the general safety of citizens and the protection against anything that can threaten that safety, including exposure to violence and other forms of crime. Gender differences are reflected in this aspect as well, suggesting that women feel less secure and protected when moving in public than men. While walking half of the male respondents feel safe (50.3%), in the case of women this share is only 28.1%. On the other hand, half of the women reported feeling unsafe when walking (51%), which is the case with 29% of men surveyed. Another interesting observation is that respondents who have sufficient resources only for the most basic needs feel significantly less safe than other respondents - as many as 57% of respondents in this category said they did not feel safe when walking.
• There is not even one aspect of walking as a mobility option in Sarajevo that at least half of the respondents are satisfied with.
• The citizens of Sarajevo rated positively the presence of pedestrian rest places - 47.1% believe that there are enough such places in Sarajevo.
• Less than two-fifths of respondents (38.8%) believe that there are enough greenery and tree alleys providing pedestrians with sun protection.
• The greatest dissatisfaction of the citizens of Sarajevo is caused by improper and threatening parking of cars - only 9.9% of respondents agree with the statement that cars are parked properly and in a way that does not hinder pedestrians to their destination.
• Only 20.3% of respondents think that drivers are sufficiently aware of pedestrians and take care of them while driving, and as many as 57.4% think that drivers are not careful enough about pedestrians.
• Overall, 38.3% of Sarajevo citizens surveyed feel safe when walking, while slightly more do not feel safe when walking (40.8%).
• Finally, 27.5% of respondents believe that sidewalks are in good condition, while as many as 45.5% think otherwise.
3.4.2 Motivation for Choosing Walking More Frequently as Mobility Option
Based on the average ratings given by Sarajevo citizens to different motivating factors for more frequent choice of walking as a mobility option, it can be concluded that citizens would be highly motivated by improvements in almost all aspects - in terms of accessibility, safety, comfort, environmental protection, and in terms of raising citizens' awareness of the benefits of walking (Table 20).
30
Table 20: Motivations for walking – average marks for the offered statements
Statements Average mark
More tree alleys and greenery and places to rest to make walking more comfortable 4.43
Better quality of sidewalks and pedestrian lines (e.g., no holes, curbs, poles and other obstacles). 4.39
More car-free zones (pedestrian and recreational) 4.38
Better street safety (from pickpockets, drunkards, abusers, stray dogs…) 4.35
More attention from car drivers 4.3
Vicinity of key services (at a walking distance) (schools, kindergartens, library, supermarkets, and other services of importance)
4.28
Learning more about the benefits of walking for my personal health and for clean air in Sarajevo 4.16
Interestingly, in the list of motivating factors, ranked as highest, is one that is directly related to comfort, but also indirectly to environmental protection. Specifically, the higher representation of green spaces, tree alleys and resting places by respondents was rated by the highest score (4.43) as a factor that would help them to start walking more to reach their desired destination. In doing so, women on average gave a higher rating to this motivating factor than men. Respondents living in better-off households would, on average, be less motivated to walk more than other respondents if the prevalence of green spaces and resting places was increased. Car drivers would also be below-average motivated, while respondents predominantly using public transportation would be above-average motivated to opt for walking. It should be emphasised that public transport users certainly use to some extent walking as one of the transport options, at least to get to the bus/ tram station or from the station to the house or some other destination. Differences are also observed among the respondents who live in some parts of Sarajevo - while greater representation of greenery and rest places would greatly motivate the residents of Stari Grad to walk more, residents of central Sarajevo would be below average motivated.
In terms of safety and accessibility, respondents would be particularly motivated by improving the quality of sidewalks and pedestrian paths - an average score of 4.39. In this case, too, men would be below-average motivated and women would be above-average. As in the previous case, the residents of Stari Grad would be far more motivated to walk more than residents of other parts of Sarajevo if the quality of sidewalks and pedestrian paths were to be improved (average 4.8).
31
More car-free zones, or more pedestrian and recreational zones, are a third-ranked factor that would help Sarajevo residents surveyed to walk to their desired destination - an average score of 4.38. This motivating factor is associated with both safety and accessibility, as well as comfort and care for the environment. When looking at the age of the respondents, only the youngest respondents (ages 18 to 29) would be below-average motivated to walk if there were more car-free zones (average grade 4.1). In addition, statistically significant differences are also observed with respect to the gender of the respondents, with the already identified trend continuing - men would be below average and women above average motivated to opt for walking as a form of mobility more often if pedestrian and recreation zones were more prevalent.
Although the increase in street safety (protection against pickpockets, bullies, stray dogs and the like) ranks fourth, this aspect was rated very high by respondents as a motivating factor for more frequent walking - an average rating of 4.35. Interestingly, street safety as a key motivator for walking was rated by far the highest average rating by housewives (as high as 4.9). Car drivers and male population, are, on average, less motivated to walk more, even if street safety measures are improved.
Another safety aspect, greater attention from car drivers, was rated relatively high as a factor that would motivate Sarajevo citizens surveyed to choose walking more often as a transport option - an average rating of 4.30. The average rating given by the housewives to this aspect is again extremely high and stands at 4.8. While car drivers would be below-average motivated to walk more, respondents primarily using public transportation to arrive at their desired destination would be above-average motivated if car drivers were more cautious when driving. Also, such a change would particularly motivate the residents of Stari Grad (average grade 4.6). If one takes into account the age of the respondents, the above-average motivation for more frequent choice of walking as a form of mobility is observed in the respondents between the ages of 46 and 64. Finally, men would also be less motivated to walk more in this aspect, while women would be significantly more motivated.
Greater accessibility of important services for respondents (such as educational and health care facilities, stores, and others) near their place of residence would be another factor encouraging them to choose to walk to reach their desired destination - average rating 4.28. The availability of services is not only related to the accessibility aspect but also to the flexibility and time required to perform the various activities. Should the availability of services in residential areas increase, the residents of Stari Grad, the female part of the population, as well as the respondents who dominantly use public transport, would be more motivated to walk more. On the other hand, such a change would motivate the employees, as well as the male part of the population, below average (in both cases the average grade is 4.1).
Better information for citizens on the benefits of walking on health and air quality, was ranked last on the list of factors that would encourage Sarajevo citizens to walk more often. However, it should be borne in mind that the average grade given by the respondents to this factor is still relatively high and amounts to 4.16. It is interesting to note that respondents from households with a high socio-economic status would be below-average motivated if citizens' awareness were raised (average grade 3.9). It can be assumed that this category of respondents is already sufficiently informed about the benefits of walking and that this is a reason for less motivation. On the other side, respondents with sufficient resources only for the most basic needs would be above-average motivated. While improving the level of awareness
32
of the benefits of walking would particularly encourage housewives to walk more, employed respondents would be below-average motivated. In this case, women would also be more motivated to walk more than men.
• With regard to more frequent choice of walking as a transport option, Sarajevo citizens would be highly motivated by improvements in almost all aspects - both in terms of accessibility, safety, comfort, environmental protection, and in raising citizens' awareness of the benefits of walking.
• Greater representation of green spaces, tree alleys and resting places by respondents was rated highest (4.43) as a factor that would help them to walk more to reach their desired destination.
• In terms of safety and accessibility, respondents would be particularly motivated by improving the quality of sidewalks and pedestrian paths - an average score of 4.39.
• Multiple car-free zones are another important motivating factor for increased walking of Sarajevo citizens (average grade 4.38).
• Increasing street safety (protection against pickpockets, bullies, stray dogs and the like), as well as greater driver attention, were also rated very high by respondents as factors that would encourage them to walk more often - average scores of 4.35 and 4.30, respectively.
• Greater accessibility of important services near where people live would be another factor that would motivate them to opt for walking in order to reach their desired destination - average rating 4.28.
• Although better information of citizens about the benefits of walking on health and air quality is ranked last in the list of motivating factors, the average rating given by respondents to this factor is still relatively high and stands at 4.16.
• In all aspects observed, women would be above-average motivated to walk more if conditions for walking would improve, while men would be below-average motivated.
3.5 Cycling as Mobility Option
3.5.1 Perception of Cycling in Sarajevo
In the survey cycling was overwhelmingly negatively rated in each of the observed aspects (Chart 21)9. The survey did not show that the perception of different aspects of cycling in Sarajevo is evaluated differently by those who at least occasionally or more often ride a bike and those who never ride it. The only positive discrepancy was observed when looking at the information of citizens about the NextBike service10, as over half of the respondents stated
9 All the respondents included in the sample who answered the questions asked were considered, not just those who actively use the bicycle as a means of transport. Given that almost all of the questions raised were related to attitudes rather than personal experience of using a bicycle, the starting assumption was that every citizen of Sarajevo could have an opinion on different aspects of using this mode of transport (eg safety, accessibility, comfort, etc.), no matter what it is not used. Specifically, citizens' attitudes can also point to the reasons for not using a bicycle as a means of transport, and provide guidance for improving specific aspects of cycling. It is also important to note that for each question there was an "I don't know" option and all respondents who selected this option were excluded from the analysis. 10 https://www.nextbike.ba/bs/sarajevo/
33
that they have heard about this service (51.8%). Among respondents with higher education, there is below average representation of those who are not familiar with NextBike service (24.2%), while among respondents who have funds exclusively for the most basic needs, as well as among the citizens of Ilijaš, the share of citizens who are not at all familiar with this service is quite high (50.7 % and 66.1%, respectively).
Chart 21: Attitudes and perceptions on cycling as a transport option in Sarajevo (in %)
Citizens of Sarajevo are overwhelmingly dissatisfied with accessibility for cyclists, as only 29.3% of respondents think Sarajevo has enough bike lanes, while half (50.9%) believes that this is not the case. Among the oldest category of respondents, there are above-average respondents who believe that the proportion of bicycle lanes in Sarajevo is adequate. Related to accessibility, but also to safety and reliability, is the issue of whether there are enough places in the city where the bike can be safely parked. The data indicate that less than a fifth of the citizens surveyed partially or fully agree with the statement that safe parking of bicycles in Sarajevo is possible in a sufficient number of designated places, while over two thirds of the opposite opinion.
When it comes to the safety of bicycle riders, only 21.1% of respondents believe that cyclists feel safe while riding, while as many as 62.3% disagree with such a rating. Some differences are observed only when looking at the level of education of respondents - respondents with higher education more often than other respondents state that they do not agree with the statement that cyclists feel safe while driving (40.5%).
The behaviour of other traffic users, especially motorists, is extremely important for cycling safety. Data indicate that only 22.9% of respondents believe that cars in Sarajevo are driven
17.9
19
21.1
22.9
29.3
51.8
6.8
12.9
16.6
20.1
19.8
1.1
75.3
68.2
62.3
57
50.9
47.2
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Itiseasytotransportbikesonpublictransport.
Thereareenoughplacesinthecitytoparkbicyclessafely.
Cyclingfeelssafe.
Carsaredrivingataspeedanddistancethatisappropriateforcyclists.
Sarajevohasenoughbikelanes.
IamfamiliarwithNextBike.
Agree Neitheragreenordisagree Disagree
34
at speeds and distances that are adequate for cyclists, while 57% of Sarajevo citizens surveyed believe that cars are not being driven in a way that would ensure the safety of cyclists as road users. In terms of this aspect, gender differences are very pronounced. Men are above average, and women below average in agreement that cars are driven at speeds and distances that are adequate for cyclists - 30.9% and 15.2%, respectively. On the other hand, the share of women who disagree with the above statement (67.1%) is far higher than the share of men (46.4%).
Flexibility to use a bicycle as a transport option was the worst rated by respondents - only 17.9% of respondents said that a bicycle can be easily transported in public transport, while three quarters (75.3%) believe that this is not the case. Among those with a high school degree, there are above average respondents who agree that it is easy to transport a bicycle in public transport, while such responses are below average represented in the group of highly educated citizens of Sarajevo. It should be noted that among the residents of Novo Sarajevo, there are more respondents who fully agree with the statement that bicycle in public transport can be easily transported, compared to residents of other parts of the city.
• Survey findings indicate that cycling is overwhelmingly negatively evaluated by Sarajevo citizens in each of the aspects observed. Only in the case of informing citizens about the NextBike service, a positive deviation was observed, as more than half of the respondents indicated that they have heard about this service (51.8%).
• Only 29.3% of respondents believe that Sarajevo has enough bike lanes, while half (50.9%) believe that this is not the case. Fewer than a fifth of citizens surveyed (19%) agree with the statement that safe parking of bicycles in Sarajevo is possible in a sufficient number of designated places, while as many as 68.2% disagree.
• With regard to the safety of bicycle riders, only 21.1% of respondents consider cycling to be safe. In addition, only 22.9% of respondents believe that cars in Sarajevo are driven at speeds and distances that are adequate for cyclists.
• Flexibility to use a bicycle is the worst rated aspect of cycling as a transport option - only 17.9% of respondents stated that a bicycle could be easily transported by public transport, while three quarters (75.3%) said this was not the case.
3.5.2 Motivation for Choosing Cycling More Frequently as Mobility Option
More effort is needed to motivate citizens to cycle more often than is the case with the use of public transport and especially with walking. This is supported by the average ratings given by the surveyed citizens to various motivating factors - in the case of cycling, the average score in any of the observed aspects reaches even a score of 4 (on a scale of 1 to 5) (Table 22). It is interesting that, generally speaking, the average grades for any observed aspect do not statistically significantly differ from the dominant transportation option used by the respondents.
35
Table 22: Motivation for choosing cycling as more frequently as a mobility option – average rating for the offered statements
Statements Average value
More cycling lanes 3.79
If drivers would pay more attention to cyclists 3.78
Better safety measures for cyclists 3.78
More parking spaces for bicycles 3.72
Learning more about the benefits of biking for my personal health and for clean air in Sarajevo 3.56
The possibility of renting a bicycle around the city for a shorter period (bike-sharing) 3.41
Making it easier to take a bike in public transport (buses/trams) 3.34
It would be most motivating for the citizens of Sarajevo to build more bike lanes, which is one of the key aspects of accessibility of cycling as a transport option - an average score of 3.79. Such a change would, however, below-average motivate retirees, citizens aged 65 or over, respondents whose households have no minor children, and residents of central Sarajevo. On the other hand, more bike lanes would particularly motivate respondents aged 18 to 29 and 30 to 45, respondents whose households have children aged 7 to 19 years, employed respondents, and in particular those currently unemployed (4.2).
Another factor that is primarily related to accessibility, but also to the aspects of flexibility and security, is the provision of more bicycle parking space. Improving the situation in this aspect would motivate the citizens of Sarajevo to cycle more - the average grade is 3.72. Such a change would most motivate the inhabitants of Ilijaš (average grade as high as 4.5), but it would be a particularly important motivating factor for unemployed respondents, students, but also for respondents whose households have children aged 7 to 19 years. On the other hand, the oldest respondents, the pensioners, the respondents in whose households there are no minor children and the residents of the centre of Sarajevo would be motivated below average.
Increasing the safety of cyclists as road users is what would highly motivate respondents to opt for cycling more often as a transport option. Respondents assigned an average grade of 3.78 to both better measures of cyclist safety (in the general sense) and more careful behaviour of motor vehicle drivers. To ensure better safety measures for bicycle riders, respondents from 18 to 29 years of age as well as unemployed would be more motivated to opt for cycling as a transport option. If motorists were more concerned with cyclists, they would be particularly encouraged to use this transport option by unemployed respondents and residents of Ilijaš.
Sarajevo citizens surveyed, for better awareness about the benefits of cycling for health and cleaner air, as a motivating factor for increased use of bicycles, give an average score of 3.56. The same trend continues with this motivating factor - respondents aged 65 or over, pensioners,
36
as well as residents of downtown Sarajevo (average grade of 2.8 only) would be below-average motivated. Interestingly, a higher level of awareness of the benefits of cycling for both the population and the environment would particularly encourage respondents who have the means only for the most basic needs to use the bicycle more as a means of transport (average grade 3.9).
The possibility of renting a bicycle to ride around the city for a short period of time is in the penultimate place in the list of factors that would help Sarajevo citizens to use their bicycle more often to reach their desired destination - average score 3.41. Such a finding is especially interesting as it indicates that citizens are not yet fully informed on the NextBike service which exists in Sarajevo (almost half of citizens has not heard about this service – Chapter 4.4.1). Unemployed respondents, respondents aged 18 to 29, as well as those aged 46 to 64, but also the female population, are more motivated than other respondents to opt for cycling more often as a transport option if the opportunity to rent a bicycle in Sarajevo is increased.
According to the respondents, the last ranked factor is directly related to the flexibility of cycling as a transport option, and it is easier to transfer bicycles to public transport vehicles - average grade 3.34. It is interesting to note that, although citizens have previously rated this aspect of flexibility as the least satisfactory (Chart 21), simpler bicycle transport for them is still the least motivating factor for more frequent use of bicycles as a means of transport. The categories of respondents who would be more motivated to opt for cycling as a transport option if the transfer of bicycles by public transport were facilitated are the youngest respondents, rural residents and employed respondents.
• The data indicate that much more effort is needed to encourage citizens to use cycling more often as a transport option than it is the case with public transport, and in particular walking.
• The average marks do not even reach a mark of 4 (on a scale of 1 to 5) for any of the observed motivating factors. In addition, the average scores for each observed aspect did not statistically significantly vary with the dominant transportation option used by the respondents.
• The citizens of Sarajevo would be most motivated if more bicycle lanes were created (average grade 3.79). They would also be motivated if more parking spaces were provided (grade 3.72).
• The safety aspect of the citizens of Sarajevo is also very important in the case of cycling. Respondents assigned an average grade of 3.78 to both better measures of cyclist safety (in the general sense) and more careful behaviour of motor vehicle drivers.
• Greater awareness of the benefits of cycling for health and cleaner air, as a motivating factor for increased use of bicycles, the Sarajevo citizens gave an average rating of 3.56, and the increased opportunities for renting and renting a bicycle gave an average rating 3.41.
• Although citizens rated easier transport of bicycles by public transport vehicles as the least satisfactory aspect, for them, improvement in this aspect is the least motivating factor for more frequent use of bicycles as a means of transport (average grade 3.34).
37
4 Conclusions 4.1 Key conclusions This representative survey with 500 transport users has explored the perceptions and attitudes among residents of the Canton of Sarajevo towards different modes of transport and has gathered insights about the motivations and potential for future mode shift from cars to other more environmentally friendly modes of transport.
Main takeaways from the survey are:
● The overall satisfaction level with existing mobility options in Sarajevo is moderate. The perception of the ability to move around the city when someone needs to or wants to is quite polarised: While 45.3% of respondents are partially or fully satisfied (especially older adults and respondents with a college degree), 31.8% (especially employees) are partially or completely dissatisfied.
● When choosing a mode of transportation, the most important aspects for respondents are punctuality, cleanliness, reliability, and safety.
● Almost half of the surveyed adults, 46.5%, said they did not drive cars (because their household does not have a car, they do not have a driver's license or for other reasons). Looking at the population of Sarajevo Canton, this percentage would be even higher if children and young people under the age of 18 are taken into account (approximately 60% of the population).
● Not surprisingly for a city with a compact centre, 54.7% stated they walk always or very often when they need to go somewhere. 47.7% opt for public transportation always or very often, compared to 39.4% who always or very often drive themselves by car. In contrast, cycling is a very unpopular choice among Sarajevans: 84.8% of the surveyed population rarely or never go by bike. Almost one quarter (23%) live in a household without a car.
● There is a clear gender gap in the perception of different modes of transport: The surveyed women less often drive a car, take public transport more often, and are more open to changing their behaviour towards low-emission modes if the conditions would improve.
● The survey reveals a massive discrepancy in the perception of driving behaviour: Almost all car drivers say about themselves that they always slow down near pedestrian crossings, give advantage to pedestrians (95.6%), and actively look out for cyclists (94.1%). In contrast to this self-perception, over two thirds (68.3%) said that other drivers do not show safe and decent driving behaviour. The survey also confirms concerningly high numbers of people who state that passengers in the backseat not always use a seat belt and drivers sometimes use their phone will driving. It can be expected that the actual number for this is much higher than what respondents admit to in a public survey. Strong support was expressed for the implementation of strict safety regulations and measures (94.7% in favour).
● While three out of four respondents (74.5%) are aware that driving by car contributes to air pollution in Sarajevo, only very few (4.7%) take the environmental impact into consideration when choosing their mode of transport.
● When it comes to public transport, users are most dissatisfied with the cleanliness, the lack of maintenance, and the fact that there is not enough room
38
for all passengers. Reliability - one of the top three criteria for choosing a mode of transport - is also seen as fairly poor by public transport users.
● The aspects most positively rated by users is that they have public transport near where they live, that in most cases public transport goes to the desired destinations (except in the hilly parts of the Canton), and that the use of public transport is seen as cost-effective (especially by retirees who have a right on fare concessions).
● The top three improvements that would motivate Sarajevans (especially women) to use public transport more often include: Better safety measures on buses and trams against pick-pocketing and bullying; comfort improvements through better quality of vehicles, such as heating, cooling, hygiene, more free seats; and faster arrivals at the destination, for instance through enforces priority lanes for public transit on the roads; bus priority traffic signals, etc.
● Walking holds a strong position among the Sarajevans surveyed, but there is definitely potential to increase walking more.
● Although polarised when asked to assess whether Sarajevo has sufficient green and tree cover and if it offers sufficient number of resting places for pedestrians, improvements in this area would be the key motivating factor for the majority of respondents (75%), especially women (80%), to consider walking more in the future.
● 7 in 10 people say that they would be inclined to walk more with improved conditions of side-walks.
● More car free zones would be equally important motivating factor (mentioned also by 7 in 10). This is hardly surprising given that there is almost universal agreement that drivers do park on sidewalks - getting in the way of the pedestrian flows (mentioned by over 80%) and that their attentiveness for pedestrians is poorly assessed by more than half of the citizens surveyed (mentioned by 58%).
● Despite cycling being the least established mobility option in Sarajevo, far lower than in many European cities, age related differences can be observed. More than 25% of Sarajevo young people (18-29) say they cycle at least from time to time.
● Concerns about safety and infrastructure are the main barriers stopping more people from cycling.
● More than 6 in 10 respondents would be prompted to cycle more frequently if it would become easier and safer. Infrastructure improvements, particularly the addition of more bike lanes (mentioned by 68%), and more parking places (64%), appear to be a primary motivating factor. Driver's behaviour also plays an important role (mentioned by 66%).
● Sarajevans are becoming increasingly aware that one does not need to own a bike to cycle (NextBike is familiar to more than 50% of surveyed citizens).
4.2 Recommendations for indicators in future research As a first step in the future research, it would be required to arrange all the indicators on different dimensions that are important for urban mobility. The first indicator that research should begin with should be the frequency of using different modes of transport. After that, if there is enough funding, it would also be useful to cover the dimension of the mobility model, which should include standard mobility during one normal business day and one usual day on weekends. This dimension reveals to us the proportion of different journeys/ modes of transport; how long the different journeys take regarding the mode of transport and the purpose of the journey. Then it is necessary to examine the satisfaction with mobility in general, but also for each mode
39
of transport that is the focus of the research. Satisfaction can be expressed on a scale of 1 to 5 or a scale of 1 to 10. After this set of questions, one should move on to the set of indicators used to determine the current state of transport. The indicators are divided into several dimensions: Availability, flexibility, security, accessibility, comfort, environment. (The list of indicators is in Table 9). Within each dimension there is a set of indicators that relate to all modes of transport, and some of the indicators relate only to some of the modes of transport. The indicators in the frame of these dimensions are best measured with a scale of 1 to 5 and are set for each mode of transport. Finally, an index can be created for each dimension based on the ratings obtained for each of the indicators. If we want to determine motivation in future research, motivation indicators should be asked separately for each mode of transport. The indicators should correspond to the indicators used to assess the current situation. Indicators can be operationalized in several ways: a list of all indicators rated by grades 1 to 5 or a list of indicators from which the respondent selects three indicators that would most motivate them to use a particular mode of transportation.
Dimensions Indicators
Use of vehicles • Frequency of car use, public transportation, walking or biking
Modes of movements • The usual movement during a typical workday and weekend: Ø Purpose of the trip Ø Duration of the trip Ø Means of transport being used
Satisfaction with mobility
• Overall satisfaction with transportation • Satisfaction with public transport • The pleasure of walking • The pleasure of cycling
Availability • Car, bike ownership • Distance to the nearest public transportation station • Infrastructure for cars, pedestrians, bicycles • Availability of public transport information, car sharing, bike
sharing, benefits of walking and biking Flexibility • Car sharing, bike sharing services
• Easy arrival at the desired location (car, public transport, walking, cycling)
• Ease of bicycles transport in the public transport Security • Sense of safety in the car, public transport, walking, cycling
• Observance of traffic rules by traffic participants (drivers, cyclists)
• Awareness of other road users (drivers versus pedestrians and cyclists).
• Sense of security related to physical violence, theft, sexual harassment (walking, public transportation, biking
Accessibility • Transportation costs for car, public transport, bicycle, hiking • Availability of parking place for cars, bicycles • Physical accessibility of public transport vehicles • Reliability of public transport timetables • Adequacy of public transport routes
Comfort • Enough space in public transport vehicles, sidewalks • Cleanliness of public transport, sidewalks.
40
• Quality of sidewalks, pedestrian paths, places for hiking and cycling, quality of public transport vehicles
• Greenery and tree-lined walkways Environment • The impact of the cars on air pollution.
• Awareness of the benefits of cycling, hiking on health and environment
41
Aneks I: Pojašnjenja na dodatna pitanja Sljedeća objašnjenja bave se pitanjima koja su se pojavila tokom prezentacije rezultata istraživanja Koordinacijskoj skupini SUMP.
Kako je utvrđen interval pouzdanosti za anketu?
Ukoliko uzmemo u obzir da ukupnu populaciju Sarajeva čini 438.443 stanovnika i da je uzorak od 500 ispitanika reprezentativan, prema formuli za računanje intervala povjeranja, dobijamo da je interval povjerenja +/-4.4. Interval povjerenja nam govori o intervalu u kome populacijski parametri mogu odstupati od dobijenih rezultata. Nivo pouzdanosti na osnovu kojeg smo računali interval povjerenja iznosi 95% što znači da sa 95% sigurnosti možemo tvrditi da bi se rezultati dobijeni na odabranom uzorku mogli uopštiti na cijelu populaciju Kantona Sarajevo, odnosno da je moguće odstupanje od dobijenih rezultata maksimalno 4.4% Npr.prema izračuntom intervalu povjerenja sa 95% sigurnosti, možemo tvrditi da ukoliko se u našem istraživanju 55% ispitanika opredijelilo za određenu tvrdnju u cjelokupnoj populaciji ovu tvrdnju bi odabralo između 50,6% i 59.4% ispitanika. Uzorak koji je planiran na početku istraživanja u potpunosti je realizovan (raspored prema socio-demografskim karakteristikama stanovništva možete pogledati u grafikonima od 1 do 8).
Formula za izračunavanje intervala pouzdanosti je sljedeća:
Interval povjerenja za pouzdanost od 95% IP95 = 1.96/SD
Standarndna devijacija SD= (100*((N-n)/(N-1))*SQRT((p/100)*(p/100)/(n-1))
Pri čemu je:
1,96 predstavlja z skor za interval pouzdanosti od 95%
N- veličina populacije,
n veličina uzorka
p je uzorački procenat, računato je na 50% jer je u tom postotku prisutna najveća uzoračka greška
Izvještaj navodi da gotovo polovina ispitanih odraslih osoba (46,5%) ne vozi automobile (bilo zato što njihovo kućanstvo ne posjeduje automobil, jer nemaju vozačku dozvolu ili iz drugih razloga). Što je s kućanstvima u kojima jedna osoba ima vozačku dozvolu i vozi ostale članove kućanstva?
Izvještaj dalje kaže da bi ukupan broj ljudi koji ne voze u Kantonu Sarajevo bio još veći (oko 60%), ako se uzmu u obzir djeca i mladi mlađi od 18 godina. Međutim, ovoj skupini zakonski nije dopušteno da vozi, pa zašto bi oni trebali biti uzeti u obzir?
Točno je da među onima koji se ne voze automobile samostalno, dio koristi iste kao putnik. Međutim, vrlo je različita kvaliteta mobilnosti bilo da se netko oslanja na člana porodice u prijevozu u odnosu na neovisnost po istom pitanju (također uzimajući u obzir Izjavu o SUMP-u za Sarajevo 2030. godine:"...i pruža svim građankama i građanima različite mogućnosti mobilnosti...").
42
Iako su u anketi sudjelovali samo odrasli, važno je naglasiti da postoji veći postotak stanovništva koji nisu vozači (nego što je zastupljeno u uzorku ankete). Postotak “ne-vozača” naglašava potrebu za stvaranjem saobraćajnog sistema koji omogućava jednostavno kretanje bez automobila - neovisno o dobi, spolu i pristupu vozilu.
U izvješću je istaknuto da 54,7% ispitanika uvijek ili vrlo često hoda, u slučaju kada trebaju stići na određenu destinaciju. Koliko su ti podaci pouzdani, obzirom da anketa nije uzela u obzir udaljenost putovanja?
Svrha ovog istraživanja nije bila da utvrdi modalitete kretanja (broj putovanja, svrha kretanja, razdaljina, vremensko trajanje i slično), već da se ispitaju stavovi građana Sarajeva o korištenju različitih vidova prijevoza, kao i njihova motivacija za prelazak sa automobila na učestalije korištenje drugih prijevoznih sredstava.
Bez obzira na razdaljine, koje nisu bile predmet ovog istraživanja, podatak o broju Ispitanika koji uvijek ili često pješači do odredišta treba uzeti kao važan indikator preferenci kao i opštih uslova za pješačenje u Sarajevu. Naime, za razliku od mnogih drugih gradova, Sarajevo odlikuje kompaktno gradsko jezgro gdje se nerijetko za manje od 10 minuta može stići do željenog odredišta. Pored toga, treba napomenuti da se piješačenje uvijek kombinuje sa javnim i drugim vrstama prijevoza, pa stoga stanovnici grada gotovo nikada nisu samo piješaci javnog prijevoza ili samo vozači automobila već su njihovi stvarni obrasci kretanja mnogo komplikovaniji.
Na koji način se tokom analize u obzir uzela teritorijalna raspodjela?
Grafikon 7 prikazuje postotak ispitanika iz brdovitih dijelova (47%) i iz ravnih naselja (54%), kako su se i oni sami identificirali. Grafikon 8 prikazuje postotak ispitanika iz različitih općina. Kad god je bilo statistički značajno da se naglasi da su ljudi s određenog terena ili općine, to je svakako blo istaknuto u određenom poglavlju.
Kako se istraživanje bavilo činjenicom da nemaju svi ispitanici iskustva s korištenjem različitih vrsta prijevoza? Na primjer, kako ljudi koji sami ne koriste bicikl mogu dati adekvatan odgovor na pitanja koja su vezana za bicikliste?
U obzir su uzeti stavovi svih ispitanika obuhvaćenih uzorkom koji su dali odgovore na postavljena pitanja, a ne samo onih koji aktivno koriste bicikl kao prijevozno sredstvo. S obzirom na to da su se gotovo sva postavljena pitanja odnosila na stavove, a ne na lično iskustvo korištenja bicikla, polazna pretpostavka bila je da svaki građanin Sarajeva može da ima formiran stav o različitim aspektima korištenja ovog vida prijevoza (npr. o bezbednosti, pristupačnosti, udobnosti itd), bez obzira na to što ga ne koristi. Naime, stavovi građana mogu da ukažu i na razloge nekorištenja bicikla kao prijevoznog sredstva, te da daju smernice za unaprijeđenje specifičnih aspekata bicikliranja. Važno je napomenuti i da je kod svakog pitanja postojala opcija „Ne znam“, a svi ispitanici koji su ovu opciju odabrali isključeni su iz analize.
Takođe, tokom analize vodilo se računa i o uticaju frekventnosti korišćenja prevoznih sredstava u odnosu na postavljeno pitanje i ukoliko su postojale statistički značajne razlike prokomentarisane su u tekstu.
43
Aneks II: Uptinik Dobar dan,
Agencija Ipsos sprovodi istraživanje o mobilnosti građana i građanki Sarajeva i održivosti gradskog saobraćajnog sistema za potrebe Kantona Sarajevo.
Najljubaznije Vas molim da nam izađete u susret i odgovorite na anketu Sve što budete iznijeli kao podatak ili mišljenje, biće u potpunosti anonimno i korišteno isključivo u istraživačke svrhe.
1. Uopšteno, koliko ste zadovoljni Vašom mobilnošću tj. mogućnošću da se krećete po Sarajevu kada to želite ili kada trebate negdje stići? Da li ste… (ANK. PROČITAJ OPCIJE)
1. Potpuno zadovoljan/zadovoljna 2. Zadovoljan/zadovoljna 3. Ni zadovoljan/na ni nezadovoljan/na 4. Nezadovoljan/nezadovoljna 5. Potpuno nezadovoljan/nezadovoljna
2. Šta Vam je od sljedećeg najvažnije pri izboru način prijevoza? Molimo odaberite ne više od tri opcije. ANK. PROČITAJ SVE OPCIJE
PROG. ROTIRAJ LISTU. UKOLIKO TREBA PONOVO PROČITAJ.
1. Pouzdanost. 2. Tačnost. 3. Dostupnost informacija o rasporedu, rutama i troškovima. 4. Vrijeme potrebno da stignem do odredišta. 5. Fleksibilnost (u smislu trase kretanja, trajanje putovanja….) 6. Trošak. 7. Udobnost. 8. Pristupačnost. 9. Čistoća. 10. Sigurnost. 11. Uticaj na životnu sredinu. 12. Privatnost. 13. Društvene interakcije.
3. Koliko često koristite svaki od sljedećih načina prijevoza kako biste došli do odredišta na koje želite ili morate stići. Koristite odgovore uvijek, veoma često, ponekad, rijetko I nikada. Koliko često se koristite…
Uvijek Veoma često
Ponekad Rijetko Nikad
1. Automobilom kao vozač 1 2 3 4 5
2. Automobilom kao putnik/ca (kada me neko drugi vozi)
1 2 3 4 5
3. Javnim prijevozom 1 2 3 4 5
44
4. Pješačenjem (uključujući invalidska kolica ili druga pomoćna sredstva)
1 2 3 4 5
5. Bicikliranjem 1 2 3 4 5
Vlastiti automobil
4. Da li Vaše domaćinstvo posjeduje automobile i da li ga vi vozite? PROČITAJ ODGOVORE
1. Da, i ja ga vozim 2. Da, ali ga ne vozim jer nisam vozač 3. Da, ali iako sam vozač ne vozim automobil koji je u vlasništvu domaćinstva. 4. Ne, domaćinstvo ne posjeduje automobili
5. U kojoj mjeri se slažete sa sljedećim izjavama o vožnji automobila po Sarajevu? Koristite skalu od 1 do 5 gdje 1 znači potpuno se slažem, 2 – slažem se, 3 niti se slažem niti ne slažem, 4 ne slažem se I 5 uopšte se ne slažem.
Potpuno se slažem
Slažem se
Nit se slažem nit se ne slažem
Ne slažem se
Uopšte se ne slažem
Ne znam / ne vozim automobil pa ne mogu da odgovorim na ovo pitanje
1. Lako je pronaći mjesto za parkiranje (garaže, parkirališta).
1 2 3 4 5 999
2. Ostali vozači pokazuju sigurno i pristojno ponašanje u saobraćaju.
1 2 3 4 5 999
3. U vožnji automobilom osjećam se sigurno.
1 2 3 4 5 999
4. Mislim da vožnja automobila pogoršava zagađenje zraka u Sarajevu.
1 2 3 4 5 999
5. Ponekad šaljem poruke ili telefoniram dok vozim.
1 2 3 4 5 999
45
6. Putnici na zadnjem sjedištu u mom automobilu uvijek koriste sigurnosni pojas tokom vožnje.
1 2 3 4 5 999
7. Aktivno pazim na bicikliste kada vozim.
1 2 3 4 5 999
8. Uvijek usporim u blizini pješačkih prijelaza i dajem prvenstvo pješacima.
1 2 3 4 5 999
9. Uzimam u obzir troškove servisa, poreza, benzina, osiguranja i parkiranja kada treba da odlučim da li ću koristiti automobil ili druge vrste prevoza.
1 2 3 4 5 999
10. Podržavam provođenje strogih sigurnosnih propisa i mjera poput ograničenja brzine u cilju smanjenja broja prometnih udesa i nesreća.
1 2 3 4 5 999
Javni prijevoz
6. U kojoj mjeri se slažete sa sljedećim izjavama o javnom gradskom prijevozu u Sarajevu? (poput gradskih autobusa, trolejbusa, minibusa, tramvaja, žičare). Koristite skalu od 1 do 5 gdje 1 znači potpuno se slažem, 2 – slažem se, 3 niti se slažem niti ne slažem, 4 ne slažem se I 5 uopšte se ne slažem.
Potpuno se slažem
Slažem se
Nit se slažem nit se ne slažem
Ne slažem se
Uopšte se ne slažem
Ne znam / ne koristim javni prijevoz pa ne mogu da odgovorim na ovo pitanje
46
1. Javni prevoz postoji u blizini mjesta gdje živim.
1 2 3 4 5 999
2. U najvećem broju slučajeva, javnim prijevozom mogu stići do željenog odredišta.
1 2 3 4 5 999
3. Javni prijevoz je pouzdan tako da mogu stići u željeno vrijeme na odredište koje želim.
1 2 3 4 5 999
4. Vozila (autobusi, tramvaji) javnog prijevoza su čista I dobro održavana.
1 2 3 4 5 999
5. U javnom prijevozu ima dovoljno prostora za sve putnike.
1 2 3 4 5 999
6. Lako dolazim do ažurnih informacija o tarifama, rutama I rasporedu vožnje.
1 2 3 4 5 999
7. Isplativo je koristiti javni prijevoz.
1 2 3 4 5 999
8. Osjećam se sigurno kada koristim javni prijevoz.
1 2 3 4 5 999
7. U kojoj mjeri bi vas sljedeće promjene motivirale da se češće vozite javnim prevozom? Molim vas koriste skalu od 1 do 5 gdje 1 znači jako bi me motiviralo a 5 uopšte me ne bi motiviralo. PROGRAMER Rotirati tvrdnje
1 2 3 4 5
1. Javni prijevoz u blizini mjesta gdje živim
1 2 3 4 5
2. Pouzdan red vožnje i adekvatnije rute javnog prevoza (na primjer, bolja povezanost linija)
1 2 3 4 5
3. Jednostavno i brzo dostupne informacije o dolasku autobusa/tramvaja
1 2 3 4 5
4. Bolji kvalitet vozila (na primjer, grijanje, hlađenje, čistoća, više mjesta za sjedenje)
1 2 3 4 5
5. Fizički pristupačnija vozila gradskog prijevoza (na primjer, jednostavniji
1 2 3 4 5
47
ulazak i izlazak u invalidskim kolicima, kolicima za djecu, i slično)
6. Bolje mjere bezbjednosti u autobusima/tramvajima (na primjer, od nasilnika, džeparoša)
1 2 3 4 5
7. Brže stizanje do odredišta, na primjer uspostavljanjem sistema žutih traka i prioriteta u raskrsnicama za vozila javnog prijevoza.
1 2 3 4 5
Pješačenje
8. U kojoj mjeri se slažete sa sljedećim izjavama o pješačenju u Sarajevu? Koristite skalu od 1 do 5 gdje 1 znači potpuno se slažem, 2 – slažem se, 3 niti se slažem niti ne slažem, 4 ne slažem se I 5 uopšte se ne slažem.
Potpuno se slažem
Slažem se
Nit se slažem nit se ne slažem
Ne slažem se
Uopšte se ne slažem
Ne znam
1. Trotoari su u dobrom stanju (na primjer, široki i uređeni bez ivičnjaka, stepenica, stubova, hidranta i drugih prepreka).
1
2 3 4 5 999
2. Vozači imaju dovoljno svijesti o pješacima i paze na njih u saobraćaju.
1 2 3 4 5 999
3. Automobili su parkirani propisno i na način koji pješacima ne ometa kretanje ka odredištu.
1 2 3 4 5 999
4. Osjećam se sigurno kad pješačim.
1 2 3 4 5 999
5. Pješaci imaju dovoljno mjesta za odmor (na primjer, klupe).
1 2 3 4 5 999
6. Postoji dovoljno zelenila i drvoreda koji pješacima pružaju zaklon od sunca.
1 2 3 4 5 999
48
9. U kojoj mjeri bi vas sljedeće promjene motivirale da češće idete pješke tamo gdje trebate ići? Molim vas koriste skalu od 1 do 5 gdje 1 znači jako bi me motiviralo a 5 uopšte me ne bi motiviralo. PROGRAMER Rotirati tvrdnje
1 2 3 4 5
1. Bolji kvalitet trotoara i pješačkih staza (na primjer, bez rupa, ivičnjaka, stubova i drugih prepreka).
1 2 3 4 5
2. Više zona bez automobila (pješačkih i rekreacijskih)
1 2 3 4 5
3. Veća pozornost vozača automobila 1 2 3 4 5
4. Bolja bezbjednost na ulicama (od džeparoša, , nasilnika, pasa lutalica…)
1 2 3 4 5
5. Bolja informisanost o prednostima pješačenja za zdravlje i za čistiji zrak u Sarajevu
1 2 3 4 5
6. Više zelenila, drvoreda i mjesta za odmor koje bi pješačenje učinile ugodnijim
1 2 3 4 5
7. Više usluga u blizini mjesta gdje živim, na pješačkoj udaljenosti (na primjer škola, vrtić, dom zdravlja, biblioteka, supermarket, i druge meni važne usluge)
1 2 3 4 5
Bicikliranje
10. Da li Vaše domaćinstvo posjeduje bicikl? ANK. PROČITAJ ODGOVORE
1. Da, i ja ga vozim 2. Da, ali ga ne vozim 3. Ne, domaćinstvo ne posjeduje bicikl
11. U kojoj mjeri se slažete sa sljedećim izjavama o bicikliranju Sarajevom? Koristite skalu od 1 do 5 gdje 1 znači potpuno se slažem, 2 – slažem se, 3 niti se slažem niti ne slažem, 4 ne slažem se I 5 uopšte se ne slažem.
Potpuno se slažem
Slažem se
Nit se slažem nit se ne slažem
Ne slažem se
Uopšte se ne slažem
Ne znam
1. Sarajevo ima dovoljno biciklističkih staza.
1 2 3 4 5 999
2. Postoji dovoljno mjesta u gradu gdje se bicikl može bezbjedno parkirati.
1 2 3 4 5 999
3. Automobili se voze brzinom i na razdaljini koja je adekvatna
1 2 3 4 5 999
49
za bicikliste.
4. Biciklisti se osjećaju bezbjedno tokom vožnje.
1 2 3 4 5 999
5. Čuo sam za NextBike. 1 2 3 4 5 999
6. Bicikl se može jednostavno prenijeti u javnom prijevozu.
1 2 3 4 5 999
12. U kojoj mjeri bi vas sljedeće promjene motivirale da češće vozite bicikl? Molim vas koriste skalu od 1 do 5 gdje 1 znači jako bi me motiviralo a 5 uopšte me ne bi motiviralo. PROGRAMER Rotirati tvrdnje
1 2 3 4 5
1. Veći broj biciklističkih staza 1 2 3 4 5
2. Kada bi vozači motornih vozila više vodili računa o biciklistima
1 2 3 4 5
3. Bolje mjere bezbjednosti za bicikliste 1 2 3 4 5
4. Više mjesta za parkiranje bicikala 1 2 3 4 5
5. Mogućnost rentanja ili iznajmljivanja bicikla po gradu na kraći vremenski period (bike-sharing)
1 2 3 4 5
6. Lakše prenošenje bicikla javnim prijevozom (autobusi/tramvaji)
1 2 3 4 5
7. Bolja informisanost o prednostima bicikliranja za zdravlje i za čistiji zrak u Sarajevu
1 2 3 4 5
O ispitaniku/ci
13. U kojoj opštini živite?
1. Stari Grad 2. Centar 3. Novo Sarajevo 4. Novi Grad 5. Ilidža 6. Vogošča 7. Drugo (molimo Vas navedite)
14. kako bi ste opisali naselje u kojem živite s obzirom na reljef? Da li je to…
1. Pretežno brdovito ili 2. Pretežno ravno 3. NE ČITAJ Ne znam
50
15. Molimo Vas recite nam koliko imate godina.
1. __________________
2. Preferirate da ne kažete
16. Koji je Vaš poslednji nivo obrazovanja
1. Nezavršena osnovna škola 2. Završena srednja škola 3. Završena viša škola 4. Završen fakultet, magistarske ili doktorske studije
17a. Koliko članova broji vaše domaćinstvo?
1. Ukupno___
17b. A koliko je od toga…
2. djece do 6 godina _____ 3. djece između 7 i 19 godina ____ 4. djece preko 19 godina____
18. Molimo vas da nam kažete da li ste… ANK. PROČITAJ ODGOVORE
1. Zaposlen/a 2. Nezaposlen/a 3. Student/kinja 4. Domaćica 5. Penzioner/ka
19. i Za kraj, koja od sljedećih tvrdnji najbolje opisuje vaše domaćinstvo? ANK. PROČITAJ ODGOVORE
1. Prilično loše živimo, nemamo dovoljno ni za najosnovnije životne potrebe) 2. Imamo samo za najosnovnije potrebe 3. Zarađujemo dovoljno novca, ali nemamo novac za luksuzne stvari 4. Imamo dovoljno novca i možemo da priuštimo luksuznije stvari (skupa putovanja,
uređaje, lične stvari).
Hvala na Vašem vremenu!
51
Aneks III: Tabele
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
