EURAC - PP6. INTER-Regio-Rail Diminishing barrier to regional rail transport

Similar documents
2009/10 NWT Aurora Visitor Survey Report. Industry, Tourism and Investment Government of the Northwest Territories

Example of a successful campaign in the Liszki District near Kraków

Survey on passengers satisfaction with rail services. Analytical report. Flash Eurobarometer 326 The Gallup Organization

The Experience of Vienna City

GfK. Growth from Knowledge

National Household Travel Survey Add-On Use in the Des Moines, Iowa, Metropolitan Area

Puget Sound Transportation Panel Factors in Daily Travel Choices September 1991

Advanced nodes and SUMP how Parma adressed sustainable mobility in its wide area

Bus Passenger Survey spring Centro authority area, and National Express (NX) routes within Centro

Modernising the Great Western railway

PLEASE INDICATE THE MAIN POINTS YOU TALKED ABOUT AT YOUR TABLE

URBAN MOBILITY DESIGN INTELLIGENTLY

EXPERIENCE IN A COMPANY-WIDE LONG DISTANCE CARPOOL PROGRAM IN SOUTH KOREA

SCOOTER SHARING SURVEY

UTA Transportation Equity Study and Staff Analysis. Board Workshop January 6, 2018

TRANSIT FEASIBILITY STUDY Town of Bradford West Gwillimbury

MAR1011. West Birmingham Bus Network Review March 2010

CUSTOMER CHARTER NSW. this IS HoW we roll CUSTOMER CHARTER. transitsystems.com.au

Results from the North American E-bike Owner Survey

Denver Car Share Program 2017 Program Summary

Integrating transport (buses)

Submission to Greater Cambridge City Deal

ECHOtourism STATistics

2014 Bay Area Council Survey Report of Selected Results: Energy and Communications

2.1 Outline of Person Trip Survey

Mysuru PBS Presentation on Prepared by: Directorate of Urban Land Transport

Findings from the Limassol SUMP study

Certificate in a vocational program

How to enable Munich s Freedom (from private cars)? Impacts of the first Mobility Station on urban mobility

Tours on: BMW / Ducati / Harley-Davidson / Honda / Royal Enfield / Suzuki / Triumph / Vespa

G. Di Pasquale, A. Santiago Dos Santos, A. Galindo Leal, M. Tozzi. PluService, IPT, UITP

Tours on: BMW / Ducati / Harley-Davidson / Honda / Royal Enfield / Suzuki / Triumph / Vespa. ADD-ON DAY Munich. with a Guided City Tour.

Public Opinion of Waterloo Region Rapid Transit Proposal May 2011

Who has trouble reporting prior day events?

One City, One System: Integrating Public Urban Transportation in Coimbra

Presentation A Blue Slides 1-5.

SEPTEMBER 2017 EVALUATION REPORT NEW MOBILITY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Office of Transportation Bureau of Traffic Management Downtown Parking Meter District Rate Report

Consumer attitudes to low and zero-emission cars

SPARTA Ridership Satisfaction Study

Presented by Eric Englert Puget Sound Energy September 11, 2002

Customer Survey. Motives and Acceptance of Biodiesel among German Consumers

Bus Passenger Survey autumn 2013 results Merseytravel (Merseyside PTE area)

From a marketplace for mobility towards Mobility as a Service in Rotterdam (Nl)

Measure R. Measure R

CONSUMER ATTITUDES TOWARD E- BIKES: A REVIEW OF THREE STUDIES IN NORTH AMERICA

How BRT can develop the bus mode in Dublin Paddy Doherty, Chief Executive, Dublin Bus

IMPACT OF THE BUS LOCATION SYSTEM ON BUS USAGE. - Morioka City -

Teaching English to Foreigners: 2008

Fresno County. Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) Public Workshop

2016 Car Tech Impact Study. January 2016

Sustainable mobility challenges for the transition targets

Onward travel. Insights from HS2 online panel

Motorcycle Safety Questionnaire

Case Study: City of San Diego

Feeder systems Jose Manuel Vega Barbero, University of York

6/6/2018. June 7, Item #1 CITIZENS PARTICIPATION

Sofia Urban Transport challenges and strategies

Evaluation of an Electric Bike Pilot Project at Three Employment Campuses in Portland, Oregon

Appendix B CTA Transit Data Supporting Documentation

Welcome. Green Line in Your Community

Customer Charter Audit Quarter

Innovation and Transformation of Urban Mobility Role of Smart Demand Responsive Transport (DRT) service

How to manage large scale infrastructures? Infrastructure planning within Toulouse s SUMP. Alexandre Blaquière. 1st December 2016

visits4u case studies: Wheelchair Accessible Tuk-tuk Phnom Penh, Cambodia

1 Have you used Sun Trolley (which also includes Riverwalk Trolley)? Yes (Go to Question #2) No (Go to Question #10)

Electric Alliances the entrepreneurial view Healthy competition

Comparing the Quality of Service of Bus Companies Operating in two Cities in Brazil

Green Line LRT: Beltline Segment Update April 19, 2017

Public Opinion of Air Pollution in Delhi

Energy saving targets! - Tested in households in the Swedish largest electricity saving experiment

by Hilton Hotel,Waterloo Road, London SE1 at 09am. Last departure from this stop is at hrs.

2017 Colorado Phase 2 Regulatory Rate Review Frequently asked questions

Urban Transport systems in major cities in China. Sun Kechao Senior Engineer China Academy of Transportation Sciences, Beijing, China

Abstract. Executive Summary. Emily Rogers Jean Wang ORF 467 Final Report-Middlesex County

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION

Prof. Dr. Andrea Giuricin. Benefits of the competition in the High speed rail and the limits to the competition

Recommended Vision for the Downtown Rapid Transit Network

April 2010 April 2010 Presented by Alan Eirls

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

BORAL CONCRETE GLENORIE

2017 FLEET BAROMETER. Belgium

EMC Automotive Event Woerden, 13 en 14 november ENEVATE Outlook. Edwin Bestebreurtje FIER Automotive. FIER Automotive

FINAL REPORT TO SHEFFIELD BUS PARTNERSHIP OPERATIONS GROUP FROM: WORK PACKAGE 5 PERFORMANCE FRAMEWORK & UPDATE DATE OF MEETING: 19 OCTOBER 2012

The 1997 U.S. Residential Energy Consumption Survey s Editing Experience Using BLAISE III

Intercity Perfectly designed for your needs

Can Public Transportation Compete with Automated and Connected Cars?

WARES. October, 2018

Contents. 1. Classification. 2. Concepts and Solutions 3. List of Bus Manufacturers 4. Conclusions. Module C: Vehicles and Vehicle Technologies

CITY OF LONDON STRATEGIC MULTI-YEAR BUDGET ADDITIONAL INVESTMENTS BUSINESS CASE # 6

E-Mobility in the City of Klagenfurt on Lake Wörthersee CEMOBIL project. Julia Zientek Austrian Mobility Research, FGM-AMOR Graz

Five ways to considerably lower OPEX costs for EV charging networks. May 2016

The Motorcycle Industry in Europe. Powered Two-Wheelers the SMART Choice for Urban Mobility

We Want Your Input! Review the design alternatives and tell us what s important to you in the design of these areas of the approved BRT Network:

Food-Labeling Poll 2008

2011 Saskatoon Transit Services Annual Report

Public Perception of Energy Issues

Brain on Board: From safety features to driverless cars

GoToBermuda.com. Q3 Arrivals and Statistics at September 30 th 2015

ACT Canada Sustainable Mobility Summit Planning Innovations in Practice Session 6B Tuesday November 23, 2010

Transcription:

www.interregiorail.eu info@interregiorail.eu - PP6 Diminishing barrier to regional rail transport 4.1.18 Model Survey for Customer Satisfaction Analysis in Regional Rail Transport in South Tyrol. Summer session interview results of interview Accademia Europea di Bolzano This project is Viale Druso 1 implemented through the 39100 Bolzano CENTRAL EUROPE Program Tel. 0471 055055 co-financed by the ERDF www.eurac.edu

1 Introduction South Tyrol is located in north Italy, near the boundary with Austria to the north/north-east and Switzerland to the north-west. The two main railways are in Venosta Valley in north west towards Switzerland and on east side there is Pustertal Valley towards Austria. Both of them are surrounded by Alpine landscape and run through cultural heritage of South Tirol. Venosta Valley railway (Bolzano-Merano-Malles) was built in 1906. In November 1918 the Italian railway authority was placed in charge of the Venosta Valley railway. A few years later, and for several decades, the Littorina train would travel up and down the valley. In the late 1980s, rumors about the closure of the railway line began to intensify. People had grown accustomed to these rumors ever since they began to spread as far back as 1961. Yet this time they seemed more plausible. The Italian railway authority launched a radical streamlining effort in order to cut off the dead branches in the national railway system. On June 9 th, 1990 the Venosta Valley witnessed the local train making its last journey, marking the end of an era. But a new era began when the Provincial Authorities of Bolzano took over the disused railway line. Work was soon under way to revamp the railway line and tunnels, fix the bridges and level crossings and purchase state-of-the-art rolling stock. The Venosta Valley railway was being prepared for the new millennium. On May 5 th, 2005, following a monumental overhaul funded by the Provincial Authorities, the first train began its journey to Mals. Today the line is really useful for commuters and local people, but also many tourists,, outdoor lovers or nature enthusiasts use it. The railway transport was integrated by buses and city buses that connect train stations to city centers and other small villages in the Valley. This railway line could be used more by tourists, especially to support those forms of tourism related to nature. Pustertal railway (Brunico Fortezza San Candido) has been inaugurated in 1871 and the only railway access to Tyrol was the Salzburg-Rosenheim-Kufstein. Alongside this primary function, the new railway line brought new tourists to Pustertal. As a result, towns such as Toblach, Prags and Sexten became extremely popular tourist destinations. In 1908, the Bruneck- Freienfeld electric railway was completed, while the Toblach-Cortina-Calalzo line (also known as the Dolomite Railway) became operational in 1920. Today on the Pustertal railway arrive trains from the Austrian Railways, Trenitalia and upon December 2008, the new FLIRT trains (Fast Light Innovative Regional Train) of SAD Trasporto Locale Spa. The Provincial Government 3

of South Tyrol purchased eight FLIRT trains that are similar inside and outside to the ones already operating in the Venosta valley, including the official South Tyrol logo. During the summer months, these trains may also carry up to 120 bicycles, while the seats can be reclined and turned into ski holders. This versatility makes them a valid alternative to automobiles, not only for commuters, holidaymakers, excursionists and sports enthusiasts. This line has a high tourist vocation, both for its ski resorts in winter for its peaks in summer. Compared to Venosta Valley, it is used much more from tourists than from commuters, and its railways tracks is much better in terms of logistics, since almost all stations are close to city centers. After these years the Autonomous Province of South Tyrol in collaboration with Trenitalia and SAD, have continued to invest in infrastructure and information to improve the service quality but they have never checked and investigated the passenger satisfaction. The number of passenger increases every years, not only that of residents but also of tourists, especially in summer. identifies this gap and thanks to the European Union and the project, the customer satisfaction analysis will be done on three target and in two different periods. 2 Survey structure 2.1 Questionnaires The idea was to investigate the passengers satisfaction of three different targets: Train users resident in South Tyrol; No train users resident in South Tyrol; Tourists. 2.1.1 Train users The first target includes daily train commuters as well as people that use the train few days per month. We structure the questionnaire in six different topics 1. Daily habits we ask information regarding the regional train daily use and the reasons to use it; 4

2. Reachability of the train station we ask about the means of transport used to reach the train station and the destination, also regarding the time that it takes; 3. Satisfaction related to a. Reliability; b. Comfort ; c. Infrastructure of the stations; d. Public transport network system; e. Information before travelling; f. Information at the station; g. Information on the train; h. Ticket system; i. Pricing; j. Service. We ask for the satisfaction and for the explicit and implicit importance of each factor (through a ranking). Satisfaction Ranking Figure 1: point 3.7 of the questionnaire. Satisfaction regarding the information on the train. 4. Importance of the main factors: a. Reliability; b. Comfort; c. Infrastructure of the stations; d. Public transport network system; 5

e. Information before travelling; f. Information at the station; g. Information on the train; h. Ticket system; i. Pricing; j. Service. Figure 2: point 4 of the questionnaire: ranking of the main factors. 5. Satisfaction regarding the regional rail transport we would like to know in general the satisfaction on the provincial rail transport; Figure 3: point 5 of the questionnaire. 6

6. Personal information we ask about age, gender, place of residence, job, number of components of the family and annual income. 2.1.2 No train users The second target is the no users. In this questionnaire we investigate the reasons why residents in the valleys served with the rail transport, do not use the rail transport. The main topics are: 1. Means of transport used during the work time and the free time, and reasons not to use the train; 2. Information; 3. Information regarding the ticket system; 4. Information regarding the daily ride; 5. What has to change to use the rail transport?; 6. Personal information. 2.1.3 Tourists Finally the third target is the tourists. For them we create two different questionnaires. Face to face questionnaire On-line/phone questionnaire Tourists at the beginning of their holiday in South Tyrol Tourists at home after the end of their holiday Expectation Experience Figure 4: scheme of the tourist questionnaires The first one, let us analyze their expectations on rail transport in South Tyrol. 7

It will be done at the beginning of their holiday in South Tyrol, they have to stay at least 4 days, otherwise the questionnaire cannot be done and they have to be willing to leave their e-mail address or telephone number to do a second questionnaire. Figure 5: contact for the second questionnaire. The face to face questionnaire asks information about: 1. Travel information the reason to come in South Tyrol and with whom; 2. Daily means of transport at home; 3. Means of transport used to arrive in South Tyrol; 4. Prevision of the means of transport that will be use during the holiday; 5. Information before and during the holiday; 6. Expectations on public transport in South Tyrol; 7. Personal Information. In the second questionnaire we investigate why they do not use the rail transport, or their satisfaction if they used the train during their holiday. To compare the information we put a number on each questionnaire, this lets us compare the expectation with the experience. 8

Figure 6: Tourist questionnaire the number is necessary to compare the data face to face questionnaire on-line questionnaire The on-line questionnaire has a barrage question (Did you use the train during your stay in South Tyrol?), according to which it splits in two branches. If the tourist has travelled by train we ask for: 1. Reachability of the train station 2. Daily habits 3. Satisfaction related to a. Reliability; b. Comfort ; c. Infrastructure of the stations; d. Public transport network system; e. Information before travelling; f. Information at the station; g. Information on the train; h. Ticket system; i. Pricing; j. Service. 9

4. Importance of the main factors 5. Satisfaction regarding the regional rail transport 6. Personal information If the tourist did not travel by train, we ask for: 1. Means of transport used during the holiday in South Tyrol; 2. Reason why he/she did not use the train; 3. Information; 4. Ticket system; 5. What has to change to use the rail transport?; 6. Personal information. 2.2 Conduction of the questionnaires To write the questionnaires we did a series of qualitative interview with the main stakeholders in South Tyrol and we also did a literature review on mobility surveys. After the draft version we did a pre-test to see the effectiveness of the questions and to see the reaction of the interviewees. This is one of the most important phase where questions can be modified in order to get the final version of the questionnaires. The conduction of the questionnaires will be divided into Summer session (August-October 2011) and in Winter session (December-April 2012). The Summer session was distributed in the Venosta Valley and in the Pustertal Valley. 10

Figure 7: territorial distribution of the questionnaires conduction Summer session 2011. In the Summer session we collected 492 questionnaires of train users, 270 questionnaires of no train users, 488 questionnaires of tourists at the beginning of their holiday and 114 tourist on-line/phone questionnaires. The data analysis is done though the statistic software SPSS. We based our elaboration on the importance performance analysis and the satisfaction pyramid. 11

3 Results The results are presented per each target and at the end there are a comparison between inhabitants and tourists that use the train and inhabitants and tourists that do not use the train. 3.1 Train users resident in South Tyrol Do you travel with 23% 77% SAD Trenitalia N=491 12

3.1.1 Personal information 3.1.1.1 Age 8 7 6 5 4 72% 15% 9% 3% 16-30 31-45 46-60 > 60 years old N=489 3.1.1.2 Gender 36% 64% men women N=491 13

3.1.1.3 Job 5 42% 4 26% 21% 4% 3% 2% 2% Employee School-aged student Universityaged student Retired Selfemployed Housewife Unemployed N=466 3.1.1.4 Size of household 49% 5 4 26% 22% 2% 1-2 3-4 5-6 >7 N=481 14

3.1.1.5 Net household income (in thousands of euros) 27% 23% 18% 14% 8% 4% 2% 3% <10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 >70 N=398 15

3.1.2 Travel habits 3.1.2.1 On average, how often per month do you use the train (estimate)? 4 22% 16% 11% 8% 3% 1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 26-30 >30 times per month N=477 3.1.2.2 Reason for the train trip 7 6 6 5 4 35% 5% Work/school Free time Other N=489 16

3.1.2.3 What type of ticket do you use primarily? 4 33% 27% 17% 13% 6% 4% 1% 0,2% Season ticket Abo+/ Abo+70 Abo+/ Abo+60 Prepaid value ticket Family ticket Single ticket Other Mobilcard N=478 3.1.2.4 I use the train because: I do not have another alternative It is the quickest way to reach the desire destination It s cheaper than other means of transportation 61% 56% 10 8 6 4 78% 77% It s more environmentally friendly than other means of transportation 68% It s less complicated than other means of transportation Otherwise, we would need an additional car/motorbike 48% 67% It s more comfortable than other means of transportation The timing is attractive 62% 63% I like riding the train Note: I fully agree 10 - I somewhat agree 75%.- I partly agree 5 - I don't quite agree 25% - I don't agree at all N da 467 a 483 17

3.1.2.5 How do you get to the departure train station? 4 32% 23% 21% 4% By foot Public transport Bike Car Other N=492 3.1.2.6 How much time do you need to get to your departure train station? 4 36% 22% 18% 12% 1% 5% 5% < 5min 6-10 min 11-15 min 16-20 min 21-25 min 26-30 min >30 min N=476 18

3.1.2.7 How do you get from the destination train station to your final location? 6 51% 5 4 31% 7% 2% By foot Public transport Bike Car Other N da 491 a 492 3.1.2.8 How much time do you need to get from the destination train station to your final location? 5 4 4 19% 18% 0,44% 6% 6% < 5min 6-10 min 11-15 min 16-20 min 21-25 min 26-30 min >30 min N=459 19

3.1.3 Satisfaction 3.1.3.1 How much are you satisfied with Main Factors 9 Importance 1. Reachability 2 2. Reliability 3. Travel comfort 8 4. Infrastructure at the Departure Station 5. Network Quality 6. Information before the trip began (i.e. 7 1 underway, at home, at work, etc.) 7. Information at the train station 11 8. Information on the Train 6 9. Ticketing 5 3 10. Service 11. Prices 5 7 4 5 6 7 8 Satisfaction 6 9 4 8 10 4 N da 483 a 489 20

3.1.3.2 Tyrol? In general, how much are you satisfied with the rail transport in South 7 63% 6 5 4 19% 7% 8% Fully satisfied 10 75% 5 25% Very unsatified N=489 3.1.3.3 In general, how much are you satisfied with the reachability of the train stations? 7 6 5 4 64% Mean = 85% 12% 3% 0,41% Fully satisfied 10 75% 5 25% Very unsatified N=492 21

3.1.3.4 How much are you satisfied with the reliability? 6 5 51% Mean = 68% 4 17% 9% 3% Fully satisfied 10 75% 5 25% Very unsatified Main factors 9 Importance 1. Punctuality (adherence to schedules) 2. Making connections 3. Reliability of information on delays 1 8 7 6 4 5 6 2 5 7 8 Satisfaction 4 3 N da 470 a 489 22

3.1.3.5 How much are you satisfied with travel comfort? 6 5 53% Mean = 71% 4 21% 18% 8% 1,23% Fully satisfied 10 75% 5 25% Very unsatified Main factors 1. Safety 2. Cleanliness of cars/seats 3. Seating comfort 4. Accessibility/usability 5. Temperature 6. Condition of interior furnishings of trains 5 11 4 9 8 7 2 8 6 Importance 3 1 5 4 5 6 7 8 10 6 Satisfaction 7 12 4 9 7. Noise level from train noise 8. Number of seats 9. Noise level from other passengers 10.Operation, cleanliness of rest rooms 11.Air quality 12.Room for hand baggage, baby strollers, skis, etc N da 481 a 492 23

3.1.3.6 How much are you satisfied with infrastructure at the departure station? 5 46% Mean = 63% 4 11% 11% Fully satisfied 10 75% 5 25% Very unsatified 2% Main factors 1. Accessibility/usability 2. Number of available seating 3. Comfort of available seating 4. Lighting of the relevant station areas 5. Number of parking spaces 6. Location of parking space 7. Safety at the train station 8. Cleanliness of the train station 9. Number of station counters 10.Opening time of station counters 11.Number of ticket machines 12.Usability of the ticket machines 13.Walkways within the railway station 2 8 9 8 7 6 5 Importance 7 1 5 4 4 4 3 5 6 7 8 Satisfaction 6 9 10 12 11 13 N da 467 a 491 24

3.1.3.7 How much are you satisfied with the public transport network? 6 5 51% Mean = 65% 4 31% 9% 9% 0,63% Fully satisfied 10 75% 5 25% Very unsatified Main factors 1. Ease in reaching of the destination 2. Morning schedule 3. Schedule during the day 4. Evening schedule 5. Schedule after 8:00 P.M. 6. Schedule on Sundays and holidays 7. Connections to other trains 8. Connections to other public transportation 7 4 5 4 5 5 6 7 8 Satisfaction 8 9 4 9 8 7 6 Importance 3 2 1 6 N da 477 a 488 25

3.1.3.8 How much are you satisfied with the information before the trip began (i.e. underway, at home, at work, etc.)? 5 42% Mean = 61% 4 33% 12% 3% Fully satisfied 10 75% 5 25% Very unsatified Main factors 1. Information by telephone 2. Information over the Internet 3. Information in brochures/printed schedules 9 8 Importance 7 1 6 5 4 5 6 7 8 3 Satisfaction 4 2 N da 464 a 490 26

3.1.3.9 How much are you satisfied with information at the train station? 5 44% Mean = 62% 4 33% 11% 2% Fully satisfied 10 75% 5 25% Very unsatified Main factors 1. Information about connection possibilities 2. Information on delays 3. Information over the loudspeakers 2 4. Schedule posters at the stops 5. Information given by the staff 9 8 7 Importance 1 6 4 3 5 4 5 6 7 8 Satisfaction 4 5 N da 474 a 491 27

3.1.3.10 How much are you satisfied with information on the train? 4 34% 33% Mean = 61% 17% 6% Fully satisfied 10 75% 5 25% Very unsatified Main factors 1. Information on connections 2. Information on delays 3. Information over loudspeakers 4. Visual information 5. Information given by the staff 9 8 2 7 Importance 1 6 3 5 4 5 4 6 7 8 Satisfaction 4 5 N da 482 a 488 28

3.1.3.11 How much are you satisfied with ticketing? 5 46% Mean = 64% 4 28% 13% 11% Fully satisfied 10 75% 5 25% Very unsatified 2% Main factors 1. Information on available tickets offered 2. Possibilities to purchase tickets 3. Ease in understanding/transparency of different offers 4. Use/stamping of the ticket 9 8 7 Importance 2 6 1 4 5 6 5 7 8 Satisfaction 3 4 4 N da 473 a 488 29

3.1.3.12 How much are you satisfied with prices? 5 4 4 31% Mean = 62% 13% 15% Fully satisfied 10 75% 5 25% Very unsatified 1% Main factors 9 1. Price-to-quality relationship 2. Ease in understanding the information on available 8 prices 3. Advice from the personnel on individual prices and services available 7 4. Communication with price changes 5. Fairness of the pricing system 6 Importance 1 2 4 5 5 6 7 8 Satisfaction 5 3 4 4 N da 468 a 490 30

3.1.3.13 How much are you satisfied with service? 5 4 4 27% Mean = 61% 13% 15% 4% Fully satisfied 10 75% 5 25% Very unsatified Main factors 1. Competence of the employees 2. Friendliness/helpfulness of the employees 3. Possibility to file complaints 4. Handling of complaints 9 8 2 7 Importance 1 6 5 4 5 6 7 8 Satisfaction 4 3 4 N da 477 a 480 31

3.2 No train users resident in South Tyrol 3.2.1 Personal Information 3.2.1.1 Age 6 51% 5 4 29% 14% 5% 0,37% 16-30 31-45 46-60 61-75 >75 years old N=270 3.2.1.2 Gender 46% 54% men women N=270 32

3.2.1.3 Job 7 63% 6 5 4 17% 7% 6% 3% 3% 1% Employee School-aged student Selfemployed Universityaged student Retired Housewife Unemployed N=269 3.2.1.4 Size of household 6 53% 5 4 28% 18% 1% 1-2 3-4 5-6 >6 N=267 33

3.2.1.5 Net household income (in thousands of euros) 4 33% 21% 13% 3% 5% 4% 1% <10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 >70 N=207 34

3.2.2 Travel Habits 3.2.2.1 Means of transport used Other Car 5 4 By foot Bike WORK LEISURE Public transport N=270 WORK LEISURE Car 41% 29% By foot 18% 23% Public transport 15% 14% Bike 15% 24% Other 11% 11% 35

3.2.2.2 I do not use the train because Because I feel disturbed by the other passengers Because I cannot get where I want to go with the train and public transportation The timing is not attractive 83% 71% It s more expensive than other means of transportation 9 75% 8 72% 7 6 5 81% It s more complicated than other means of transportation 76% 73% It s less comfortable than other means of transportation It s too loud in the train Because it is too slow / Because the travel times are too long 78% Because it is not reliable/punctual 77% 81% 71% I can rely upon the my car/motorcycle 82% I like driving a car/riding a motorcycle It s no more environmentally friendly than other means of transportation Note: I fully agree 10 - I somewhat agree 75%.- I partly agree 5 - I don't quite agree 25% - I don't agree at all 36

3.2.2.3 Do you know where you can get information about riding the train (schedules, tickets, prices)? 19% 81% yes no N=270 3.2.2.4 Where can you get information about riding the train (schedules, tickets, prices)? 5 4 48% 37% 6% 3% 1,27% 1,27% 0,85% 3% Internet and App for Smart phone and Ipad Ticket and information desk at the station Printed schedules Green number - InfoMobilità Tourist Office Relatives and Friends Travel Agency Other N=270 37

3.2.2.5 Do you know which tickets you should use for regional rail travel? 46% 54% yes no N=270 3.2.2.6 With which tickets are you familiar for regional rail travel? Abo+/Abo+70 Season ticket Single ticket 18% Prepaid value ticket 17% Family ticket 11% Other Abo+/Abo+60 4% 6% MobilCard 3% N=270 38

3.2.2.7 If you use the train, do you know how much would be the travel cost per month? 25% 74% yes no N=240 3.2.2.8 How much would be the travel cost per month? 5 45% 4 24% 15% 5% 2% 0-10 11-25 26-50 51-100 101-150 >150 per month N=64 39

3.2.2.9 What would have to change in order for you to use the train more regularly? Accessibility of the stations or new stations 27% Reliability (no travel connections, punctuality) Schedule (more rides, better connections) 18% 17% Comfort, cleanliness and safety 12% Change in thinking or limitation for the use of the car Pricing 8% Nothing Better bicycle transportation, accessibility for the handicapped and baby strollers 4% 3% N=270 40

3.3 Tourists at the beginning of their holiday 3.3.1 Personal Information 3.3.1.1 Age 4 36% 22% 27% 13% 2% 16-30 31-45 46-60 61-75 >75 years old N=486 3.3.1.2 Gender 31% male 69% female N=485 41

3.3.1.3 Tourists come from 55% 4 36% 4% 4% 1% Germany Italy Switzerland EU Other N=488 3.3.1.4 Size of residence place 25% 23% 16% 15% village (<5,000 inhabitants) small city (from 5,000 to < 20,000 inhabitants) city (from 20,000 to < 100,000 inhabitants) large city (from 100,000 to < 500,000 inhabitants) metropolis (> 500,000 inhabitants) N=488 42

3.3.2 Holiday features 3.3.2.1 How many times have you been to South Tyrol? 5 52% 4 7% 9% 2% 4% 7% < 5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 26-30 >30...times N=481 3.3.2.2 How many days are you stay in South Tyrol? 5 4 34% 48% 15% 1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 >20...days 2% 1% N=486 43

3.3.3.1 Are you travel with? 7 63% 6 5 4 8% 2% with my spouse/partner with my family on my own with a tour group N=488 3.3.3.2 Holiday reasons 29% 25% 15% 11% 7% 6% 6% 5% 6% 5% N=488 44

3.3.3.3 Which means of transportation do you use at home for daily mobility? Car 5 41% 4 By foot 15% Other 4% 19% Public transport Bike 3.3.3.4 With which means of transportation did you arrive in South Tyrol? Car 71% Train 15% Bus Other By foot Bike Scooter/motorcycle Carpool 6% 3% 2% 1, 0,93% 0,37% 4 5 6 7 8 N=488 45

3.3.3.5 How do you plan to primarily move around during your vacation in South Tyrol? car 4 32% 36% by foot 3% other 6% 22% public transportation bicycle N=492 46

3.3.4 Information 3.3.4.1 Information with regard to public transportation in South Tyrol 4 5 6 7 8 I already informed myself about public transportation in South Tyrol before my trip started I feel that I am well informed about the public transportation services in South Tyrol I know when I can arrive at which destination with public transportation I know where in South Tyrol to best get information about public transportation I will get information about public transportation at the Tourist Information center I will get information about public transportation at my accommodations I will get information about public transportation at the railway station I know which tickets are available for public transportation in South Tyrol I know where I can purchase tickets for public transportation in South Tyrol I know how to use the tickets 43% 62% 64% 71% 55% 58% 47% 56% 64% 65% Note: I fully agree 10 I somewhat agree 75% I partly agree 5 I don't quite agree 25% I don't agree at all N da 481 a 487 47

3.3.5 Expectation 3.3.5.1 Expectation with regard to public transportation in South Tyrol 8 85% 9 I expect to get good information with regard to how to make use of what is offered 85% I expect tickets that are easy to use 87% I expect tickets with a good price-to-quality relationship 87% I expect good service 85% I expect comfortable vehicles 86% I expect reliability 89% I expect short travel times 84% I expect good connections 85% Note: I fully agree 10 I somewhat agree 75% I partly agree 5 I don't quite agree 25% I don't agree at all N da 486 a 487 48

3.4 Tourists on-line/phone questionnaire During your stay, did you use the Vinschger railway / Pusterer railway? 29% yes 71% no N=114 3.4.1 Personal information 3.4.1.1 Age 5 4 36% 4 17% 2% 5% 16-30 31-45 46-60 61-75 >75 years old N=114 49

3.4.1.2 Gender 29% 71% Women Men N=114 3.4.1.3 Size of household 8 72% 7 6 5 4 27% 1% 1-2 3-4 5-6 N=112 50

3.4.1.4 Job 4 5 Retired 43% Employee 34% Self-employed 15% Housewife 5% School-aged student University-aged student 2% 1% N=114 3.4.1.5 Net household income (in thousands of euros) 28% 25% 17% 8% 8% 9% 3% 3% <10 10-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 >70...thousands of N=65 51

3.4.2 Tourists who used the train during their holiday 3.4.2.1 How often during your stay did you use the Vinschger (Val Venosta) Railway / Pusterer (Val Pusteria) Railway? 9 8 7 6 5 4 88% 17% 1-2 3-4 > 5...times 35% N=33 3.4.2.2 Which destinations did you reach by the train including further travel by bus? 4 5 City or town center 44% Museum 12% Beginning of hiking trail Bike path 12% Cable car Other 5% 7% N=59 52

3.4.2.3 What type of ticket did you use? 4 5 Single ticket 41% Prepaid value ticket 14% Mobilcard museomobil Card 8% bikemobil Card 3% Other 5% N=33 3.4.2.4 Where did you buy the tickets? 4 5 Ticket and information desk at the station 39% Ticket machine at the train station 16% Ticket machine on the train 3% Tourist office 23% In the hotel 6% Other 13% N=31 53

3.4.2.5 I used the train because: In so doing, I have more possibilities than with the car I can arrange my vacation better and more flexibly I m taking a car-free vacation 75% It s cheaper than other means of transportation 10 It s less complicated than 8 other means of 62% 79% transportation 6 6 66% 4 75% It s more comfortable than other means of transportation 81% I like riding the train The timing is attractive 76% 69% I get to the destination quickly 39% 89% It s more environmentally friendly than other means of transportation I can rely upon the train Note: I fully agree 10 - I somewhat agree 75% - I partly agree 5 - I don't quite agree 25% - I don't agree at all N=28 to 31 54

3.4.2.6 How did you get to the departure train station? 4 33% 28% 25% 13% 3% Car Public transportation Bike By foot Other N=33 3.4.2.7 How much time do you need to get to your departure train station? 24% 27% 24% 12% 12% < 5 min 6-10 min 11-15 min 16-20 min > 20 min N=33 55

3.4.2.8 How did you get from the destination train station to your final location? 6 56% 5 4 7% 15% 2% Car Public transportation Bike By foot Other N=33 3.4.2.9 How much time do you need to get to your final destination? 4 28% 31% 19% 9% 13% < 5 min 6-10 min 11-15 min 16-20 min > 20 min N=32 56

3.4.2.10 How much are you satisfied with the rail transportation in South Tyrol? 4 6 8 10 Reliability 83% Reachability 7 Prices Network Quality Travel comfort 55% 59% 58% Information at the train station Information before the trip began Ticketing Service Information on the train Infrastructure at the train station 45% 39% 39% 36% 34% 34% Note: I am fully satisfied 10 I am satisfied 75% I am partly satisfied/unsatisfied 5 I am unsatisfied 25% I am fully unsatisfied N=21 to 33 57

3.4.2.11 How much are you satisfied with the rail transportation in South Tyrol? 9 Importance 8 7 2 6 5 1 Satisfaction 7 3 4 5 6 5 7 8 9 10 4 6 Main Factors 8 4 9 1. Reachability 2. Reliability 3. Travel comfort 4. Infrastructure at the Departure Station 5. Network Quality 6. Information before the trip began (i.e. underway, at home, at work, etc.) 7. Information at the train station 8. Ticketing 9. Service 10.Prices Factors Satisfaction Importance 1 Reachability 85% 62% 2 Reliability 86% 74% 3 Travel comfort 83% 53% 4 Infrastructure at the departure station 73% 45% 5 Network Quality 82% 61% 6 Information before the trip began (i.e. underway, at home, at work, etc.) 8 45% 7 Information at the train station 69% 53% 8 Ticketing 66% 42% 9 Service 74% 4 10 Prices 75% 46% N=21 to 33 58

3.4.2.12 Before to coming in South Tyrol for your holiday, did you get information on public transportation? 48% 52% yes no N=33 59

3.4.3 Tourist who did not use the train 3.4.3.1 Which means of transport do you use Car Other 5 4 Bike By foot...at home...on vacation Public Transport N=81...at home...on vacation Other 4% 3% Bike 6% Public transport 19% 22% By foot 15% 36% Car 41% 32% 60

3.4.3.2 To which destination did you travel? 4 32% 34% 14% 2% 4% 7% 8% Other Events Bike path Museum Cable car Hiking trail City or town center N=81 3.4.3.3 I do not use the train because The timing is not attractive Because I feel disturbed by the other passengers Because I cannot get where I want to go with the train and public transportation Because it is too slow / Because the travel times are too long 53% Because it is not reliable/punctual It s more expensive than other means of transportation 6 5 4 24% 14% 7% 19% 18% 31% 12% 34% 22% I can rely upon the car/motorcycle It s more complicated than other means of transportation It s less comfortable than other means of transportation 44% It is too loud in the train I like driving a car/riding a motorcycle It s no more environmentally friendly than other means of transportation Note: I fully agree 10 - I somewhat agree 75% - I partly agree 5 - I don't quite agree 25% - I don't agree at all N=47 to 54 61

3.4.3.4 Did you know where you could get information about the rail transportation in South Tyrol? 7 no yes N=81 3.4.3.5 Where did you get the information about rail transportation in South Tyrol? 4 Tourist office 37% Ticket and information desk at the station Internet and App for Smart phone and Ipad 19% 21% Printed schedules 5% Travel agency Relatives and friends 1% 1% Other 16% N=54 62

3.4.3.7 Did you know which tickets are available for regional rail travel in South Tyrol? 22% 78% no yes N=81 3.4.3.8 With which tickets are you familiar for regional rail travel in South Tyrol? 4 Prepaid value ticket 38% Other 25% Mobilcard 19% Family ticket Subscription Single ticket 6% 6% 6% N=16 63

3.4.3.9 What would have to change in order for you to use the train during your next stay in South Tyrol? 4 Nothing 34% Better connections with the train stations or new stations/train stop Information 14% 16% I do not know 9% Timetable (a better timetable, better connections) 7% Comfort and cleaness 5% Change of mentality/disincentive towars the car use 5% Shortly travel time 2% A better punctuality 2% A better accessibility for hadicap people/strollers 2% A better and cheaper bike transport 2% Prices 2% N=49 64

3.5 Data comparison Data have been compared according to the transport habits of the three targets, in order to investigate whether tourists and inhabitants show similar motivational features and present same satisfaction degrees or not. In this way, the suggested corrective actions may satisfy both targets. First of all train users have been studied, both inhabitants and tourists. In detail, the reasons for the train usage, the ticket type purchased and the general satisfaction with ten factors 1 have been investigated. A specific elaboration has been dedicated to the comparison between tourists expected transport choices and choices actually made by them, as well as to their expectations and satisfaction with the transport service. In this case the analysis has been made by linking the face-to face questionnaire filled in at the beginning of the holiday with the on-line or phone questionnaire, completed after holiday. Secondly, no train users both inhabitants and tourists have been analyzed. In this case the reasons why they preferred other means of transport has been studied and the information degree on public transport has been measured. By reading results it is important to take into account that the compared targets have different sample sizes (see Tab. 5.1). As a consequence, the inhabitants sample is more reliable than the tourists one. Table 3.5.1 Sample size Tourists Inhabitants Train users 33 492 No train users 81 270 1 Reliability, comfort, infrastructure of the stations, public transport network system, information before travelling, information at the station, information on the train, ticket system, pricing, service. 65

3.5.1 Train users 3.5.1.1 I use the train because: I can rely upon the train I get to the destination quickly It s cheaper than other means of transportation 10 8 6 4 It s more environmentally friendly than other means of transportation It s less complicated than other means of transportation Otherwise, we would need an additional car/motorbike It s more comfortable than other means of transportation The timing is attractive I like riding the train Residenti Residents Turisti Tourists Note: I fully agree 10 I somewhat agree 75% I partly agree 5 I don't quite agree 25% I don't agree at all N resident=467 to 483 N tourist=28 to 31 Residents Tourists It s cheaper than other means of transportation 78% 62% It s more environmentally friendly than other means of transportation 77% 89% It s less complicated than other means of transportation 68% 79% It s more comfortable than other means of transportation 67% 75% I like riding the train 63% 81% The timing is attractive 62% 76% Otherwise, we would need an additional car/motorbike 48% 75% I get to the destination quickly 61% 69% I can rely upon the train 56% 39% 66

3.5.1.2 Which ticket did you use? BikemobilCard 5 Subscription 4 MuseomobilCard Abo+ Mobilcard Prepaid value ticket Single ticket Family ticket Residents Tourists N resident=478 N tourist=33 Residents Tourists BikemobilCard 3% MuseomobilCard 8% Mobilcard Single ticket 4% 41% Family ticket 6% Prepaid value ticket 13% 14% Abo+ 44% Subscription 33% 67

3.5.1.3 How much are you satisfied with the rail transport in South Tyrol? 9 Importance 2 8 2 7 1 10 6 5 1 5 Satisfaction 7 3 3 4 5 6 5 7 8 9 10 7 8 6 4 6 4 9 8 9 4 Residenti Residents Turisti Tourists N resident=483 to 489 N tourist=21 to 33 2 Residents Tourists Factors Satisfaction Importance Satisfaction Importance 1 Reachability 75% 7 85% 62% 2 Reliability 68% 83% 86% 74% 3 Travel comfort 71% 55% 83% 53% 4 Infrastructure at the departure station 63% 34% 73% 45% 5 Network Quality 65% 58% 82% 61% 6 Information before the trip began (i.e. underway, at home, at work, etc.) 61% 39% 8 45% 7 Information at the train station 62% 45% 69% 53% 8 Ticketing 64% 39% 66% 42% 9 Service 61% 36% 74% 4 2 Cfr. Nota 1. 68

10 Prices 62% 59% 75% 46% 3.5.1.4 How much are you satisfied with reliability? 9 Importance 1 8 7 1 6 Satisfaction 4 5 6 5 7 8 9 10 2 4 2 3 3 Residenti Residents Turisti Tourists N resident=470 to 489 N tourist=24 to 33 Factors 1. Punctuality (adherence to schedules) 2. Making connections 3. Reliability of information on delays 69

3.5.1.5 How much are you satisfied with travel comfort? 8 Importance 4 7 8 2 3 8 6 1 5 3 Satisfaction 4 5 11 11 2 4 5 6 7 5 12 7 8 9 10 6 10 6 9 1 7 4 10 12 9 Residenti Residents Turisti Tourists N resident=481 to 492 N tourist=26 to 33 Factors 1. Safety 2. Cleanliness of cars/seats 3. Seating comfort 4. Accessibility/usability of the infrastructure 5. Temperature 6. Condition of interior furnishings of trains 7. Noise level from train noise 8. Number of seats 9. Noise level from other passengers 10. Operation, cleanliness of rest rooms 11. Air quality 12. Room for hand baggage, baby strollers, skis, wheelchairs, etc. 70

3.5.1.6 How much are you satisfied with the infrastructure at the departure station? 8 Importance 7 7 7 1 2 6 8 2 12 5 3 1 8 5 Satisfaction 4 9 3 10 4 4 4 5 6 7 6 8 9 9 10 5 12 6 11 11 13 13 Residenti Residents Turisti Tourists N resident=481 to 492 N tourist=26 to 33 Factors 1. Accessibility/usability 2. Number of seats available in the station 3. Comfort of available seating 4. Lighting of the relevant station areas 5. Number of parking spaces 6. Location of parking spaces 7. Safety at the train station 8. Cleanliness of the train station 9. Number of station counters 10. Opening hours of the station counters 11. Number of ticket machines 12. Usability of the ticket machines 13. Walkways within the railway station 71

3.5.1.7 How much are you satisfied with the network quality? 8 Importance 1 7 2 1 3 6 3 8 7 2 7 4 Satisfaction 5 4 5 5 6 7 8 9 4 8 6 9 4 6 9 5 Residenti Residents Turisti Tourists N resident=477 to 488 N tourist=26 to 33 Factors 1. Ease in reaching of the train station 2. Morning schedule 3. Schedule during the day 4. Evening schedule 5. Schedule after 8:00 P.M. 6. Schedule on Sundays and holidays 7. Connections to other trains 8. Connections to other public transportation 9. Travel duration 72

3.5.1.8 How much are you satisfied with the information before the train trip began (i.e. underway, in the hotel, etc.)? 8 Importance 2 7 2 6 3 Satisfaction 5 4 5 6 7 8 9 3 4 1 1 Residenti Residents Tourists Turisti N resident=464 to 490 N tourist=10 to 15 Factors 1. Information by telephone 2. Information over the Internet 3. Information in brochures/printed schedules 73

3.5.1.9 How much are you satisfied with the information at the train station? 8 Importance 2 7 6 3 1 2 Satisfaction 1 4 5 4 4 5 3 6 7 8 9 4 5 5 Residenti Residents Turisti Tourists N resident=482 to 488 N tourist=25 to 31 Factors 1. Information about connection possibilities 2. Information on delays 3. Information over loudspeakers 4. Information on the display board 5. Information from the train staff 74

3.5.1.10 How much are you satisfied with ticketing? 8 Importance 7 1 2 2 6 Satisfaction 1 4 5 6 5 7 8 9 3 4 3 4 4 Residenti Residents Turisti Tourists N resident=473 to 488 N tourist=22 to 30 Factors 1. Information on available tickets offered 2. Possibilities to purchase tickets 3. Ease in understanding/transparency of different offers 4. Use/stamping of the ticket 75

3.5.1.11 How much are you satisfied with prices? 9 8 Importance 1 1 7 6 2 3 Satisfaction 2 4 5 6 5 7 8 9 4 3 5 4 4 5 Residenti Residents Turisti Tourists N resident=468 to 490 N tourist=21 to 30 Factors 1. Price-to-quality relationship 2. Ease in understanding the information on available prices 3. Advice from the personnel on individual prices and services available 4. Communication about changes in the prices 5. Fairness of the pricing system 76

3.5.1.12 How much are you satisfied with service? 9 Importance 8 1 2 7 1 2 6 Satisfaction 4 5 6 5 7 8 9 3 4 3 4 4 Residenti Residents Turisti Tourists N resident=477 to 491 N tourist=22 to 28 Factors 1. Competence of the employees 2. Friendliness/helpfulness of the employees 3. Possibility to file complaints 4. Handling of complaints 77

3.5.1.13 Satisfaction per each factors and rail company 4 5 6 7 8 Ease in reaching of the train station Reliability 58% 76% 72% 71% Travel comfort 51% 77% Infrastructure at the departure station Network Quality 57% 58% 65% 67% Information before the train trip began (i.e. underway, in the hotel, etc.) Information at the train station 54% 55% 63% 64% Information on the Train Ticketing Prices 41% 61% 66% 61% 63% 61% Service 53% 64% Satisfaction in general 54% 71% SAD Trenitalia Note: I am fully satisfied 10 I am satisfied 75% I am partly satisfied/unsatisfied 5 I am unsatisfied 25% I am fully unsatisfied N SAD=290 to 377 N Trenitalia=82 to 112 78

3.5.1.14 Tourists forecast and choice about the use of public transport during their holiday in South Tyrol. Forecast to use the public transport Total Yes No Use of public transport Yes 51 17 68 No 11 35 46 Total 62 52 114 N=114 3.5.1.15 Means of transport chosen from tourists having forecasted to use the public transport during their holiday. 4 5 Car 18% Public transport 48% whereof train Bike 4% By foot 29% Other 2% N=114 79

3.5.1.16 Expectation and satisfaction of tourist that have used the train during vacation 88% 87% 84% 79% 77% 68% 94% 7 13% 13% 16% 14 14% 7% 23% Medium expectation Satisfied 18% 6% Indifferent Unsatisfied Information Ticketing Price-toquality relationship Service quality Comfort Reliability Travel duration Connection N=114 80

3.5.2 No users train 3.5.2.1 I did not use the train because The timing is not attractive Because I cannot get where I want to go with the train and public transportation 6 5 4 I like driving a car/riding a motorcycle Because it is too slow / Because the travel times are too long I can rely upon the my car/motorcycle It s more complicated than other means of transportation Resident Tourist Note: I fully agree 10 I somewhat agree 75% I partly agree 5 I don't quite agree 25% I don't agree at all N resident=267 to 269 N tourist=47 to 54 Reasons Resident Tourist Because I cannot get where I want to go with the train and public transportation I like driving a car/riding a motorcycle I can rely upon the my car/motorcycle 53% 53% 5 44% 49% 31% It s more complicated than other means of transportation 47% 34% Because it is too slow / Because the travel times are too long 39% 19% The timing is not attractive 31% 24% 81

3.5.2.2 Did you know where you could get information on rail transport in South Tyrol? 81% 9 8 7 6 5 4 Yes 7 19% No Resident Tourist N resident=270 - N tourist=81 3.5.2.3 Where could you get information on rail transport in South Tyrol? 4 5 Internet and App for Smart phone and Ipad 19% 48% Ticket and information desk at the station 21% 37% Printed schedules 6% 5% Green number - InfoMobilità 3% Tourist Office 1% 37% Relatives and Friends 1% 1% Travel Agency 1% 1% Other 3% 16% Resident Tourist N resident=270 - N tourist=81 82

3.5.2.4 Did you know which tickets are available for regional rail travel in South Tyrol? 78% 8 7 6 54% 46% 5 4 22% No Yes Resident Tourist N resident=270 - N tourist=81 3.5.2.5 With which tickets are you familiar for regional rail travel in South Tyrol? 4 Prepaid value ticket MobilCard Family ticket Abo+ 3% 6% 11% 17% 19% 24% 38% Subscription Single ticket Other 6% 6% 6% 18% 25% Resident Tourist N resident=270 - N tourist=81 83

3.5.2.7 What would have to change in order for you to use the train during your next stay in South Tyrol? 4 Better connections with the train stations or new stations/train stop 16% 24% Shorter travel time A better puntuality Accessibility/usability for the handicapped, or travelers with a lot of luggage/strollers 2% 2% 2% 2% 9% Timetable (a better timetable, better connections) 7% 17% Comfort and cleaness A better and cheaper bike transport Prices Change of mentality/disincentive towars the car use Security Information Nothing I do not know 5% 3% 2% 2% 5% 2% 4% 8% 14% 9% 34% Resident Tourist N resident=260 N tourist=49 84