Ex ante evaluation - Area of Burgos Deliverable 6.2

Transcription

1 Ex ante evaluation - Area of Burgos Deliverable 6.2 CiViNET Spain and Portugal Network, Burgos José María Diez Hernán Gonzalo December 2015 Contract N : IEE/12/970/S

2 Table of contents 1 Introduction Background The SmartMove project Content of this Deliverable 6 2 Data collection Data collection profile of implementation area Data collection - situation before 7 3 Profile of implementation area 8 4 The situation before the implementation Participants of the campaign Persons who did not participating in the campaign 35 5 Summary and conclusion 37 6 References 38 2

3 3

4 1 Introduction 1.1 Background The SmartMove project addresses key action on energy-efficient transport of the Intelligent Energy Europe programme (STEER). In line with the Transport White Paper it focuses on passenger transport and gives particular emphasis to the reduction of transport energy use. 1.2 The SmartMove project The delivery of public transport (PT) services in rural areas is faced with tremendous challenges: On the one hand the demographic dynamics of ageing and shrinking societies have particular impacts on the PT revenues depending on the (decreasing) transport demand. On the other hand, PT stops density and the level of service frequency are often of insufficient quality. Thus, there is a need for the development of effective feeder systems to PT stops and for the adaptation of the scarce PT resources to user needs. For the SmartMove project, feeder systems are the different ways of linking a specific region with the back bone PT system, usually a bus or train network or a combination of both. This can be done by improving the walking and cycling facilities to and around the stations, by implementing flexible bus systems or by promoting carpooling or car sharing etc... However, even if sufficient rural PT systems are available, large parts of the population face diverse subjective barriers to use PT. This is even more relevant for PT feeder systems: in many cases citizens are not even aware of their existence or, if they are aware of them, there exist subjective barriers to their use. These problems are addressed within SmartMove by implementing Active Mobility Consultancy (AMC) campaigns for PT lines and their feeder systems in eight rural and peripheral areas. The objective of the AMC campaigns within the project aims at promoting the use of PT via personalised travel marketing approach. The word active in the term active mobility consultancy has a twofold meaning. On the one hand, it refers to the active process of informing people on PT: it is not PT users, who have to inform themselves about PT services; rather the PT operators that have to inform their (current and potential) customers according to their individual needs. For this purpose, current and potential PT users are contacted to provide them with demand based information via different communication channels. The second meaning refers to several active measures aimed at decreasing subjective barriers such as overestimating prize and travel time whereas underestimating the supply and options to the use of rural PT systems. The AMC campaigns are more than purely the provision of information: active measures will be offered in addition to the written information and the consultancy talks that are usually applied in similar campaigns. This might include actions like practical traveller training, citizen participation in planning or guided tours for PT feeder schemes. Additionally, information and feedback on user needs can be 4

5 collected within the AMC campaign. This supports the adjustment of PT offers in line with users requirements. The AMC concept used in SmartMove builds on existing approaches, which will be further developed through SmartMove based on the exchange of experience and mutual learning. In particular, we will develop existing AMC approaches along 4 lines: (i) the adaptation of the existing approach to recent developments, (ii) the consideration and inclusion of feeder systems into the AMC campaign, (iii) the development and application of a common monitoring and evaluation method and, (iv) the adaptation of the AMC concept to specific requirements of the implementing regions. The result is an easy to use AMC concept that can be applied by PT operators all over Europe. The aim is to solve the specific, significant challenges of PT schemes in rural areas. A main pillar of the concept is the extension of the AMC concept to PT feeder systems as they are crucial factors for rural PT systems. Better knowledge gained on this subject helps to improve public transport in rural areas. From a scientific point of view, the information attained about a feeder system based AMC campaign makes an important contribution to the further development of personalized travel marketing approaches. Even more important, by implementing a large range of dissemination activities, such as webinars and take-up seminars, not only the SmartMove partners, but also a broad range of stakeholders are informed about the manifold possibilities and advantages of an AMC campaign. Eight rural and peripheral regions in Europe prepare, implement and evaluate a local Active Mobility Consultancy campaign. PT operators achieve insight into the demands of both current PT users and those who do not currently use PT systems, by applying the AMC campaign. If the non-use of PT is caused by hard facts e.g. the location of the PT stops or schedule organization PT operators can adapt their services to the demand of potential users. This will increase opportunities to make PT systems attractive for new passengers. Each of the AMC campaigns to be conducted through SmartMove will be based on a shared methodological approach which will then be tuned in practice to the needs of the local specific situation. These include the specific target groups, the specific cultural barriers, barriers and enablers, the type of PT feeder system (a possibility to reach PT stops by individual or public means), the spatial aspect (e.g. compactness vs spread, topography and geography, environment), the socio political aspects at the appropriate decision making level, the administrative aspects, the economic aspect and the planning aspects. Within each region, we have defined targets of several hundreds of households to be contacted. As a result, we expect a substantial mode shift to public transport, which in turn will lead to a substantial increase on energy efficiency, a decrease of resources consumed and a reduction of the greenhouse gas emissions caused by road traffic. 5

6 1.3 Content of this Deliverable The impacts of the AMC campaigns are evaluated in a process- and output evaluation. Output evaluation refers to the measurement of the direct quantitative effects of the campaigns, e.g. mode shift or the number of additional public transport passengers. This information is used as input to calculate secondary effects of the campaigns, e. g. the reduction of CO2 emissions. Based on this, a cost-benefit analysis and a cost-effectiveness analysis are calculated. Statistical figures of the process are collected at each stage of the campaign, e. g. number of people contacted, response rate, figures about materials ordered etc., in order to identify factors of success or failure of the AMC campaigns (process evaluation). Interviews with current and potential public transport users give additionally information to public transport operators about customer satisfaction and the needs of improvement. The aim of this deliverable is to present and evaluate key figures that had been collected before the AMC campaigns were conducted. The profile of the implementation area contains relevant information on socio demographic factors and the existing mobility behaviour of the inhabitants and participants. These framework conditions may help to explain divergent campaign impacts amongst the different implementation areas in the later stages of the project. The variables describing the characteristics of the participants of the campaign are the core elements of evaluation. Furthermore this deliverable presents the participants diverse motivations to use or not to use public transport services as well as the responses obtained from the people who chose not to participate prior to the campaign. 6

7 2 Data collection 2.1 Data collection profile of implementation area A literature review was carried out to obtain the relevant information for the profile of the implementation area. The sociodemographic figures have been retrieved from the Statistics Spanish website, and the local observatory of Economic issues which offers most of the required data for the implementation area. The local observatory of mobility offers as well the data for the evaluation of the inhabitants mobility pattern of the implementation area, along with some data results from the PTP-Cycle Project (IEE, ). 2.2 Data collection - situation before MS-excel based data sheets have been prepared for all local implementation partners to be filled in for each person. The structure of the excel file includes the name of the variable; a short description and the format (open text, integer, date, predefined answers to be selected by a drop down button). Data are collected for each person individually, i. e. data of a person are entered individually in one row of the data base. The data collection is structured as follows: General information (address and names of target persons, dates of contacts, information if the person is a public transport user or not etc.) Information concerning the questionnaire to be carried out before the campaign (modes used last week, knowledge about the particular line, rating of the performance of the particular line, suggestion for improvements etc.) Alternatively to the MS Excel based data sheets, another MS Excel based database has been developed to enable the data collection in the same way and structure as described above. The information was collected from the participants by personal interviews as in the City of Burgos primarily were contacted by telephone and then visited, but only those who answered affirmatively were visited and interviewed. The obtained information was either simultaneously or afterwards entered into the MS Excel input form. 7

8 3 Profile of implementation area The implementation area of Burgos, a city located in the north of Spain, is focused on the G3 area of the City, located in the North-East of the City, and approximately 2 km far from the City Centre. Figure 3-1: Screenshot of the City (Source: Google, 2015) and the distance and location of the target area. Figure 3-2: Screenshot of the city divided into zones (Source: Urban Planning City of Burgos, 2014) with the target area coloured in yellow. The SmartMove project is only implemented in a part of the city. The SmartMove implementation area covers a total area of 2 km 2. There are 10,538 people living in a total of 4,700 apartments and flats. [Urban Planning City of Burgos, 2014]. 8

9 The people in the area are in their late 30s, 40s or early 50s. They have sons and daughters around the most of them (independent sons and daughters) and the situation is that both (parents, as they don t have to be in charge of children, and sons and daughters, as they are independent) are very likely to change the modal split. The situation is that the industrial area from Gamonal is not very far (2-3 km), but the industrial area of Villalonquéjar is quite far (7-8 km) if we compare normal distances in the city. The University is exactly on the other side of the City (West) far about 7-8 km. The gross regional product for the city of Burgos is per capita [Eurostat, 2015], much higher than the National (Spanish) one, around 24,900. There is no specific data available for the area, but we can think it is the same or even higher, as the area is an established zone with people that already have finished (or they are going to finish soon) the payment of their mortgages and they are focused on the education of their sons and daughters for example. 9

10 Table 3-1: Profile of the implementation area Burgos G3 (population and transport demand) [Economic Issues Observatory City of Burgos 2015, Urban Planning City of Burgos 2014, Eurostat, 2015] Category Variable name Variable label [Unit] Implementation Area Population Area Population Gender Age Professional status Educational status Area total Inhabitants total 2 [km²] [number] Population change over the last decade 1) [%] men 1) women 1) age class (< 18 years old) 1) age class (18-64 years old) 1) age class (> 64 years old) 1) Employed 2) unemployed / home duties (incl. pensioners) 2) in school / training 2) primary education 1) secondary education 1) higher education 1) 48 [% of total number] 52 [% of total number] 19 [% of total number] 61 [% of total number] 20 [% of total number] 55 [% of total number] 36 [% of total number] 9 [% of total number] 21 [% of total number] 50 [% of total number] 28 [% of total number] Transport demand Modal split (n=5000 households) Trip rate Car incl. motorcycle drivers 1) 25,8 [%] Motorcycle riders 1) 0,7 [%] Car or motorcycle passengers 1) 5,2 [%] Public transport 1) 18,3 [%] Cycling 1) 8,9 [%] Walking 1) 41,1 [%] Number of trips per workday and person 1) 3.00 [trips/day] 1) City of Burgos as a whole 2) Province of Burgos Table 3-1 presents the sociodemographic figures of the implementation area. Relating these data to the Spanish average, it is in line with the Spanish figures in terms of change of population (although minor than bigger cities such as Madrid or Barcelona), in line with the distribution of age (slightly higher percentage over 65 years old and slightly below the average in minus 18), less percentage than the average in terms of population occupied (up to 58%) and higher figures in terms of 10

11 unemployed and home duties. This doesn t mean higher percentage of unemployment in the City, in fact, Burgos has survived the crisis with notable fortitude, and while other cities present a percentage of 25% or more, Burgos is the fourth City in Spain in terms of less number of unemployed people, with about 17-18% (Spanish Statistics Institute, 4 th trimestral report 2015). It means high number of students, home duties people, retired people Figures of studies shows very similar results that at National level in higher education (slightly lower, as the national average is 30%) but enormously higher in terms of secondary education (including professional skills development studies) with 50% versus 22%. This is mainly due to the good educational offer in the City, firstly, and secondly, maybe because these types of data come from the City Council and those who achieved the secondary educational degree are recognized automatically. Those who finish higher education (University) have to report the City Council and very probably this is the reason Burgos don t show so high figures in higher education as a good percentage of people never reported to the Municipality that they have achieved University studies. In terms of primary school, Burgos shows lesser figures than the National average, 48% only having a 21%. Looking at the figures for transport demand, it is noticeable the high percentage of people walking. This is mainly because in the case of Burgos, the project is not focusing on a rural area; it is focusing on people they have to move to far places. These figures are from the whole city, and the short distances and the traditional way of moving in the city is walking. Motorised private transport is used with a share of 32% (25% as a driver, 0,7% by motorbike and 5% as a passenger). During the last years the use of bike has increased from hardly 0,5-1% in 2006 up to close to a 9% in At the same time, the bus is less and less used in the City and the percentage has been reduced from 31% in the middle of the last decade up to 14 million uses to 12 million now (or less). 11

12 Figure 3-1: Modal Split of modes used in the City [Figures from PTP-Cycle project, 2015] Table 3-2: Profile of the implementation area Burgos (public transport) [Bus Report City of Burgos 2014] VILLALONQUEJAR AREA (LINE 44) Category Variable name Variable label [Unit] Public transport Number of bus-lines in the area Frequency of the line Number of passengers of the line [Bus Report 2014] 1 [number] [minutes] Line 44, every 40 minutes [number] Occupancy level 11,61 [%] Number of seat km per workday in the area Average trip length of PT-users [Bus Report 2014] 18,320 [seat km per workday] 10,9 [km] GAMONAL AREA (LINES 4, 8, 11, 16, 20 AND 22) Category Variable name Variable label [Unit] Public transport Number of bus-lines in the area Frequency of the lines 6 [number] [minutes] 4: Every 30 minutes 8: Every 30 minutes 11: Every hour 12

13 Number of passengers of the line [Bus Report 2014] Occupancy level Number of seat km per workday in the area Average trip length of PT-users [Bus Report 2014] 16: Every 40 minutes 20: Every 30 minutes 22: Every 40 minutes [number] 4: : : : : : [%] 4: 32,48 8: 22,90 11: 19,42 16: 8,06 20: 6,10 22: 24,18 [seat km per workday] 4: : : : : : TOTAL: [km] 4: 7,1 8: 5,2 11: 5,1 16: 6,2 20: 3,4 22: 11,2 UNIVERSITY AREA (LINES 5, 7, 22, 39 AND 80) Category Variable name Variable label [Unit] Public transport Number of bus-lines in the area Frequency of the lines Number of passengers of the line [Bus Report 2014] 5 [number] [minutes] 5: Every 80 minutes 7: Every 80 hours 11: Every hour 22: Every 40 minutes 39: Every 40 minutes 80: Every 30 minutes but only service from 7:30 until 15:30 [number] 5: : : : : :

14 Occupancy level Number of seat km per workday in the area Average trip length of PT-users [Bus Report 2014] [%] 5: 44,5 7: 34,12 11: 19,41 22: 24,18 39: 31,68 80: 26,41 [seat km per workday] 5: : : : : : TOTAL: [km] 5: 8,3 7: 7,7 11: 5,5 22: 11,2 39: 7,3 80: 11,7 Tables 3-2 shows the public transport figures of the implementation area. It is important to remark that there are three areas selected: the industrial area of Villalonquéjar, in which only one line can be studied: 44; the industrial area Gamonal, in which there are six lines of the bus are studied: 4, 8, 11, 16, 20 and 22; and the University area, which is crossed by the lines 5, 7, 22, 39 and 80. The line 22 is linking the East with the West of the city and in fact, it crosses both areas. Frequencies depend on the necessities. By areas, the different bus lines have combined seat kilometres per workday for the Villalonquéjar Area of 18,320, for Gamonal Area and for the University Area a total of The average trip length of public transport users in the implementation area depends on the line, being less distance in general than bigger cities in Spain or more optimised bus lines scheme. Table 3-3: Profile of the implementation area Burgos (private car) [Burgos Mobility Observatory, 2014; IDAE, Ministry of Industry, figures from the website, 2015; PTP-Cycle Evaluation Report, 2015] Category Variable name Variable label [Unit] Private car car ownership rate [Burgos Mobility Observatory, 2014 ] 1) average trip length [PTP-Cycle Project 2015] 3) 557 [cars/1,000 inhabitants] 3,2 [km] 14

15 Average fuel consumption per car [Spanish Ministry of Industry, 2015] 2) Average CO2 emission per car [Spanish Ministry of Industry, 2015] 2) Average trip duration [PTP-Cycle Project 2015] 3) [l/km] 189,71 [g/km] 14 [min] 1) This variables are related to the whole City of Burgos from the Burgos Mobility Observatory (2014). 2) These figures are based on the website of IDAE (Energy Agency of Spain) of the Ministry of Industry (2015). 3) These variables are from the whole City of Burgos from the PTP-Cycle project (2015). The key figures for the category private car can be seen in Table 3-3 above. The car ownership rate of the City is 557 cars per 1000 inhabitants significantly exceed the Spanish average of 471 cars [Statistics Spain 2011]. Within the implementation area, the average trip length is 3,2 km, which is notably shorter than the average distance in km in Spain (11 km) in the majority of the cities [Mobility Observatory Spain, 2012]. In terms of minutes, it is also quite shorter, with an average of 14 minutes vs. 25 minutes. A final remark important to mention is that the average move in terms of work and study in Burgos is much higher than the average in the rest of the Country, as it is normal to come back for lunch to their homes, being close to 3 trips per day the average. 15

16 4 The situation before the implementation Two aspects have been collected before the campaign: Variables describing the characteristics of participants of the campaign. Variables describing characteristics of those, who were contacted, but not participating in the campaign. 4.1 Participants of the campaign Variables collected from participants are the core elements of evaluation of the campaign. The following information was collected to enable an impact analysis after the campaign has been carried out. To document a change in the participant s mobility pattern, their use of different modes of travel have been documented before the campaign takes place. Furthermore the participants have been asked to name their reasons for using or not using the available public transport services in the implementation area. The participants were also asked to list possible improvements of the bus line services. Table 4-1: Variables for reporting situation before modal split of participants AREA OF VILLALONQUÉJAR (Total = 106 Category Variable name [Unit] Modal split of participants Car drivers Motorcycle riders Car or motorcycle passengers Public transport Cycling Walking 4,43 [average days per week] n=86 persons 3 [average days per week] n=2 persons 3.24 [average days per week] n=25 persons 3.22 [average days per week] n=22 persons 2.25 [average days per week] n=16 persons 2.89 [average days per week] n=47 persons AREA OF GAMONAL (Total = 144 Category Variable name [Unit] Modal split of participants Car drivers Motorcycle riders Car or motorcycle passengers 4.36 [average days per week] n=116 persons 0 [average days per week] n=0 persons 3.38 [average days per week] n=34 persons 16

17 Public transport Cycling Walking 3.52 [average days per week] n=34 persons 3.2 [average days per week] n=25 persons 3.1 [average days per week] n=78 persons AREA OF UNIVERSITY (Total = 250 Category Variable name [Unit] Modal split of participants Car drivers Motorcycle riders Car or motorcycle passengers Public transport Cycling Walking 3.7 [average days per week] n=112 persons 2 [average days per week] n=2 persons 2.16 [average days per week] n=92 persons 3.11 [average days per week] n=126 persons 3.2 [average days per week] n=49 persons 3.63 [average days per week] n=187 persons Table 4-1 presents the data obtained by the answers to the questions inquiring after the weekly usage of the specific travel modes, which is also illustrated in percentage shares in figure 4-1 below. Motorised private transport definitely is the most popular travel mode for the industrial areas, but not for the University, in which the most popular travel mode is walking. The average participant uses the car 4.4 days per week in the industrial areas and 3,7 days for the University, even higher than the walking mode (only 3,63 in the case of the University). Following the figures showed before, walking is the second most popular transport mode for the industrial areas, and the private car is the second more popular in the University, but very closed to the use of Public Transport, only one point below driving. The use of the bus in both Industrial areas is very low, only 10%. In Villalonquéjar area is more popular the car or the motorbike as a passenger. Not in Gamonal area, in which this figure is below the use of the bus. In the University, car as a passenger is the forth more popular transport, even over the use of the bike. Bike is very low for Villalonquéjar area, slightly better for Gamonal area, and up to 8,5% in the University (over the general average for the city). 17

18 Comparing with the general figures of the city, the use of the car is much often, including the use as a passenger, and the walking mode is lesser. The use of the public transport (bus) is considerably lesser than the general figures in the case of industrial areas (8% less). Figure 4-1: Modal Split of participants (weighted after number of usage per week) AREA OF VILLALONQUEJAR AREA OF GAMONAL UNIVERSITY 18

19 19

20 Table 4-2: Variables for reporting situation before line usage of participants Category Variable name [Unit] AREA OF VILLALONQUÉJAR (Total = 106 Usage of line of participants People, who know line 44 People, who never use line 44 People, use line 44 less than once a month 1) Where 1 equals poor and 10 equals best performance 21,6% (23 out of ,3% (99 out of 106 0% (0 out of 106 People, use line 44 less than once a week 0% (0 out of 106 6,6% (7 out of 106 People, use line 44 at least once a week 4.91 out of 10 Average rating of performance of line 44 1) (n=23 Average number of days of those people 3.0 days a week using line 44 at least once a week (n=7 People possessing season ticket for the 40,5% (43 of n=106 public transport AREA OF GAMONAL (Total = 144 Usage of line of participants People, who know line 4 People, who never use line 4 People, use line 4 less than once a month People, use line 4 less than once a week People, use line 4 at least once a week Average rating of performance of line 4 Average number of days of those people using line 4 at least once a week People, who know line 8 People, who never use line 8 People, use line 8 less than once a month People, use line 8 less than once a week 11,8% (17 out of ,52% (139 out of 144 0,6% (1 out of 144 1,3% (2 out of 144 1,3% (2 out of out of 10 1) (n= days a week (n=2 22,91% (33 out of ,8% (128 out of 144 4,8% (7 out of 144 0% (0 out of 144 People, use line 8 at least once a week 6,2% (9 out of

21 6.9 out of 10 Average rating of performance of line 8 (n=33 Average number of days of those people 3.7 days a week using line 8 at least once a week (n=9 24,3% (35 out of 144 People, who know line 11 People, who never use line 87,5% (126 out of People, use line 11 less than once a 6,25% (9 out of 144 month People, use line 11 less than once a week 2% (3 out of 144 People, use line 11 at least once a week Average rating of performance of line 11 Average number of days of those people using line 11 at least once a week People, who know line 16 People, who never use line 16 People, use line 16 less than once a month People, use line 16 less than once a week People, use line 16 at least once a week 4,1% (6 out of out of 10 1) (n= days a week (n=6 14,5% (21 out of % (134 out of 144 3,4% (5 out of 144 1,3% (2 out of 144 2% (3 out of out of 10 Average rating of performance of line 16 (n=21 Average number of days of those people 2.6 days a week using line 16 at least once a week (n=3 15,9% (23 out of 144 People, who know line 20 People, who never use line 94% (136 out of People, use line 20 less than once a 3,4% (5 out of 144 month 0,6% (1 out of 144 People, use line 20 less than once a week 1,3% (2 out of 144 People, use line 20 at least once a week 5.9 out of 10 Average rating of performance of line 20 (n=23 Average number of days of those people 4.0 days a week using line 20 at least once a week (n=2 14,5% (21 out of 144 People, who know line 22 People, who never use line 94% (136 out of

22 People, use line 22 less than once a month People, use line 22 less than once a week People, use line 22 at least once a week Average rating of performance of line 22 Average number of days of those people using line 22 at least once a week People possessing season ticket for the public transport 1) Where 1 equals poor and 10 equals best performance 1,3% (2 out of 144 0,6% (1 out of 144 4,8% (7 out of out of 10 1) (n= days a week (n=7 56,25% (81 of n=144 AREA OF UNIVERSITY (Total = 250 Usage of line of participants People, who know line 5 People, who never use line 5 People, use line 5 less than once a month People, use line 5 less than once a week People, use line 5 at least once a week Average rating of performance of line 5 Average number of days of those people using line 5 at least once a week People, who know line 7 People, who never use line 7 People, use line 7 less than once a month People, use line 7 less than once a week People, use line 7 at least once a week Average rating of performance of line 7 Average number of days of those people using line 7 at least once a week People, who know line 22 People, who never use line 22 41,2% (103 out of ,6% (189 out of 250 7,2% (18 out of 250 0,4% (1 out of ,8% (42 out of out of 10 1) (n=103 1,45 days a week (n=42 52,2% (133 out of ,4% (196 out of 250 5,6% (14 out of 250 0,4% (1 out of ,6% (39 out of out of 10 1) (n=133 1,6 days a week (n=39 38,4% (96 out of ,2% (213 out of 250 People, use line 22 less than once a 2,4% (6 out of

23 month People, use line 22 less than once a week People, use line 22 at least once a week Average rating of performance of line 22 Average number of days of those people using line 22 at least once a week People, who know line 39 People, who never use line 39 People, use line 39 less than once a month People, use line 39 less than once a week People, use line 39 at least once a week Average rating of performance of line 39 Average number of days of those people using line 39 at least once a week People, who know line 80 People, who never use line 80 People, use line 80 less than once a month People, use line 80 less than once a week People, use line 80 at least once a week Average rating of performance of line 80 Average number of days of those people using line 80 at least once a week People possessing season ticket for the public transport 1) Where 1 equals poor and 10 equals best performance 0,8% (2 out of ,6% (29 out of out of 10 1) (n=96 1,9 days a week (n=29 53,6% (134 out of % (195 out of 250 6,8% (17 out of 250 0,4% (1 out of ,8% (37 out of out of 10 1) (n=55 1,85 days a week (n=55 38,8% (97 out of ,8% (212 out of 250 2% (5 out of 250 0,4% (1 out of ,8% (32 out of out of 10 1) (n=97 2,2 days a week (n=32 85,6% (214 of n=250 The bus lines are little known in general in the industrial areas (in the best cases up to 20%) but the figures in the University people are better (around 40-50%). It is especially remarkable the few people using the bus lines. In the industrial area only a range of 2-6% of the people interviewed use the bus and in the University only a range of 10-15%. Those who use the bus in a weekly pattern only use the lines an average of around 2 days per week. The marks for the bus lines are not good. Especially the one in the 23

24 industrial area of Villalonquéjar, being bellow 5. The rest of the lines receive marks around 6. It means the people are not satisfied with the service. The majority of the students have got a season ticket (85%) and good percentages in workers in the two industrial areas (53 and 40%). It is supposed they use the ticket for other kind of trips but not for work. Reasons for using/not using the public transport line and possible improvements have been collected by open answers, and classified in order to be able to compare the results between the different implementation areas. The list of answer categories from the first draft (see Deliverable D6.1) has been extended based on the open answers given by the participants. The additional categories are marked green/italic style. Table 4-3: Classification of open answers - reasons for not using lines AREA OF VILLALONQUÉJAR (Total = 106 (LINE 44) Reasons n=129 responds from 81 people [%] - of people have named this reason Time table frequency of links 0 0,00% Time table operation time 17 13,18% Location of pt stop 21 16,28% Need to carry heavy goods 10 7,75% Travel time 34 26,36% Travel comfort 3 2,33% Need to change lines to often 0 0,00% Cost, Ticket tariff 0 0,00% Own company car as an incentive 1) 12 9,30% Use of the Private Collective Transport 24 (use of the Company Bus or car-pooling) 1) 18,60% Lack of information about the service 1) 8 6,20% Time table links to other lines 0 0,00% Time table not understandable 0 (visibility, readable) 0,00% 1) The additional categories were created to represent the answers from participants out of the reasons created. AREA OF GAMONAL (Total = 144 (LINES 4, 8, 11, 16, 20 AND 22) 24

25 Reasons n=141 responds from 104 people [%] - of people have named this reason Time table frequency of links 2 1,42% Time table operation time 14 9,93% Location of pt stop 21 14,89% Need to carry heavy goods 2 1,42% Travel time 45 31,91% Travel comfort 14 9,93% Need to change lines to often 0 0,00% Cost, Ticket tariff 3 2,13% Own company car as an incentive 1) 11 7,80% Use of the Private Collective Transport (use of the Company Bus or car-pooling) 1) 17 12,06% Lack of information about the service 1) 3 2,13% Need to carry family 1) 5 3,55% Living in a village without bus connection 1) 2 1,42% Time table links to other lines 0 0,00% Time table not understandable 2 1,42% 1) The additional categories were created to represent the answers from participants out of the reasons created. AREA OF UNIVERSITY (Total = 250 (LINES 5, 7, 22, 39 AND 80) Reasons n=91 responds from 109 people [%] - of people have named this reason Time table frequency of links 21 10,19% Time table operation time 19 9,22% Location of pt stop 32 15,53% Need to carry heavy goods 0 0,00% Travel time 44 21,36% Travel comfort 56 27,18% Need to change lines to often 0 0,00% Cost, Ticket tariff 1 0,49% Lack of information about the service 1) 2 0,97% Prefer to walk or use the bike 1) 18 8,74% Use of car-pooling with colleagues 1) 13 6,31% Time table links to other lines 0 0,00% Time table not understandable 0 0,00% 1) The additional categories were created to represent the answers from participants out of the reasons created. 25

26 Figure 4-2: Reasons for not using the lines AREA OF VILLALONQUÉJAR (Total = 106 (LINE 44) AREA OF GAMONAL (Total = 144 (LINES 4, 8, 11, 16, 20 AND 22) 26

27 AREA OF UNIVERSITY (Total = 250 (LINES 5, 7, 22, 39 AND 80) Table 4-4: Classification of open answers - reasons for using lines AREA OF VILLALONQUÉJAR (Total = 106 (LINE 44) 27

28 Reasons n=7 entries from 7 people [%]- of people have named this reason Time table frequency of links 0 0% No car available 0 0% Location of pt stop 1 14% No stress, safe trip 2 29% Travel comfort 4 57% Cost, Ticket tariff 0 0% Time table operation time 0 0% Direct link 0 0% Consuming alcohol 0 0% Using travel time for other activities 0 0% Travel time 0 0% Environmental protection 0 0% AREA OF GAMONAL (Total = 144 (LINES 4, 8, 11, 16, 20 AND 22) Reasons n=53 entries from 48 people Time table frequency of links 0 0% No car available 6 11% Location of pt stop 2 4% No stress, safe trip 14 26% Travel comfort 17 32% Cost, Ticket tariff 2 4% Time table operation time 11 21% Direct link 1 2% Consuming alcohol 0 0% Using travel time for other activities 0 0% Travel time 0 0% Environmental protection 0 0% [%]- of people have named this reason AREA OF UNIVERSITY (Total = 250 (LINES 5, 7, 22, 39 AND 80) Reasons n=171 entries from 160 people Time table frequency of links 32 19% No car available 2 1% Location of pt stop 32 19% No stress, safe trip 2 1% Travel comfort 26 15% Cost, Ticket tariff 0 0% Time table operation time 21 12% Direct link 17 10% [%]- of people have named this reason 28

29 Consuming alcohol 0 0% Using travel time for other activities 0 0% Travel time 7 4% Environmental protection 0 0% Punctuality - Assure arriving on time 1) 32 19% 1) Thirty two participants explained that they used public transport because they had the feeling of arriving on time. It was decided to add Punctuality as one of the reasons. Figure 4-3: Reasons for using lines AREA OF VILLALONQUÉJAR (Total = 106 (LINE 44) AREA OF GAMONAL (Total = 144 (LINES 4, 8, 11, 16, 20 AND 22) 29

30 AREA OF UNIVERSITY (Total = 250 (LINES 5, 7, 22, 39 AND 80) 30

31 Reasons not using the bus in the industrial areas are mainly the location of PT (far from home or far from work) and time. Time is especially one of the main reasons to go to Gamonal Area. Other important reason is the Private Bus provided by the company, or the car provided by the company. This is mainly because the people taking the car they will have to use it within the day. Other reason is the timetable, as the bus has got not frequency enough. In Gamonal area there is a well-established car-pooling scheme, as a good number of people is moving this way. It is surprising that the University students had so bad image of the bus, being the first reason not being comfortable. Apart from other reasons like the industrial area (time, location of bus stops, frequency) it is remarkable that some of them prefer to walk or use the bike, or the car-pooling with colleagues. The reasons for use the bus, on the other hand, in Villalonquéjar and Gamonal Industrial areas are the comfort and stress saving using the bus. In the case of the students it is different. One of main reasons is the punctuality as they know they will arrive on time and the good frequency of some of the lines. Location of PT stops, and comfort and less stress are other reasons mentioned. Table 4-5: Classification of open answers - improvement suggestions for the PT service AREA OF VILLALONQUÉJAR (Total = 106 (LINE 44) Improvement suggestions n=58 entries from 53 people [%]- of people have named this reason Time table frequency of links 15 50,00% Time table operation time 2 6,67% Travel comfort 1 3,33% Cost, Ticket tariff 0 0,00% Location of pt stop 5 16,67% Direct link 1 3,33% More lines 1) 6 20,00% 1) Out of the participants, six suggested more lines (new lines). AREA OF GAMONAL (Total = 144 (LINES 4, 8, 11, 16, 20 AND 22) Improvement suggestions n=61 entries from 61 people [%]- of people have named this reason Time table frequency of links 25 41,67% Time table operation time 3 5,00% Travel comfort 6 10,00% Cost, Ticket tariff 0 0,00% Location of pt stop 9 15,00% 31

32 Direct link 3 5,00% More lines 1) 14 23,33% 1) Out of the participants fourteen suggested more lines (new lines). AREA OF UNIVERSITY (Total = 250 (LINES 5, 7, 22, 39 AND 80) Improvement suggestions n=186 entries from 152 people [%]- of people have named this reason Time table frequency of links 71 38,17% Time table operation time 23 12,37% Travel comfort 14 7,53% Cost, Ticket tariff 3 1,61% Location of pt stop 19 10,22% Direct link 3 1,61% More lines 1) 2 1,08% More direct routes 1) 35 18,82% More seats or bigger buses 1) 16 8,60% 1) Out of the participants, 2 suggested more lines, 35 suggested more direct routes (linked with time operation, but slightly different) and 16 more seats or bigger buses (linked with comfort, but slightly different) Figure 4-4: Improvement suggestions AREA OF VILLALONQUÉJAR (Total = 106 (LINE 44) 32

33 AREA OF GAMONAL (Total = 144 (LINES 4, 8, 11, 16, 20 AND 22) AREA OF UNIVERSITY (Total = 250 (LINES 5, 7, 22, 39 AND 80) 33

34 In the Industrial Area the main issues to improve are the terms of frequency and operation time and location of PT stops and the suggestion of more lines. In the University area the main suggestion is the frequency and the second more direct routes, as they complain due to the big area covered (more direct to the University). The time of travel and the suggestion of bigger buses or more seats are other important suggestions. This is mainly because of the full buses the peak hours in the University bus lines. 34

35 4.2 Persons who did not participating in the campaign It is always difficult to get information from persons who are not willing to participate in a survey or campaign. But in the phone calls various questions were asked to those who do not want to participate. Table 4-6: Variables for reporting situation before / non participants AREA OF VILLALONQUÉJAR (Total = 76 people do not want to participate) (LINE 44) Category Variable name Unit People who know lines People who use lines Reason: I have enough information but I don t want to change my pattern Reason: I haven t got time Reason: I m not interested 15,7% (12 out of 76 0% (0 out of 76 27,6% (21 out of 76 47,3% (36 out of 76 25,0% (19 out of 76 AREA OF GAMONAL (Total = 21 people do not want to participate) (LINES 4, 8, 11, 16, 20 AND 22) Category Variable name Unit People who know lines People who use lines Reason: I have enough information but I don t want to change my pattern Reason: I haven t got time Reason: I m not interested 71,4% (15 out of 21 23,8% (5 out of 21 47,6% (10 out of 21 47,6% (10 out of 21 4,8% (1 out of 21 AREA OF UNIVERSITY (Total = 51 people do not want to participate) (LINES 5, 7, 22, 39 AND 80) Category Variable name Unit People who know lines 68,6% (35 out of 35

36 People who use lines Reason: I have enough information but I don t want to change my pattern Reason: I haven t got time Reason: I m not interested 51 50,9% (26 out of 51 49,1% (25 out of 51 47,0% (24 out of 51 3,9% (2 out of 51 In the case of the industrial areas of Gamonal, a high percentage know the lines, and also in the University students group, being not famous the line to Villalonquéjar. The percentage of use change from 0% in the case of Villalonquéjar Industrial area to half of the students, which mean that they know and use the lines but for some reasons (enough information or not have the time) they prefer not to be visited. 36

37 5 Summary and conclusion The Ex ante Evaluation presents the data collected before the implementation of the AMC-campaign. This includes figures describing the implementation area, the participants mobility behaviour and their perception of the public transport services within their municipalities. The variation in modal split is considerable when comparing the results of the participants and the general data of the City. It is clear that the percentage of people using the car is over the general use in the City, basically because they have to travel every day to a far distance. In the University students this difference is lesser, using more the bus and less the private car. The ratios about use of the buses are not good at all, especially in the Villalonquéjar area, and even the knowledge is poor. The students have a better knowledge and use of the buses. The main complains are referred to frequency and time, so this is a good point to start to improve the system. Based on these findings the impact of the AMC-campaign will be assessed at a later stage of the SmartMove project. Furthermore the profile of the implementation area can be used as a frame of reference to allow comparability across the different implementation areas of the SmartMove project and analyse possible relations between these framework conditions and the campaign itself. 37

38 6 References Alonso de Linaje (2015), Observatorio Económica Ciudad de Burgos, Economic Issues Observatory City of Burgos, Burgos City Council. EUROSTAT (2015) - statistical office of the European Union. Available at Grupo Transyt (2012), Observatorio de Movilidad en España, Mobility Observatory Spain, Ministry of Industry. IDAE (2015), Figures of the website Ministry of Industry. ITCL (2014), Observatorio de Movilidad Urbana Ciudad de Burgos, Mobility Observatory City of Burgos, Burgos City Council. Mobility Department City of Burgos (2014), Annual Report, Burgos City Council. UZQUIZA (2014), PGOU, Plan General de Ordenación Urbanística. City Planning City of Burgos, Burgos City Council. Various (2015), PTP-Cycle Evaluation Report, PTP-Cycle Project. 38