- Email: [email protected]
Travelling to work: will people move out of their cars
PERGAMON
Transport Policy 8 (2001) 151±160
www.elsevier.com/locate/tranpol
Travelling to work: will people move out of their cars S. Kingham*, J. Dickinson, S Copsey Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Hertfordshire, College Lane, Hat®eld, Herts AS10 9AB, UK Received 1 August 1999; revised 1 December 1999; accepted 1 January 2001
Abstract This paper examines employee's perceptions of their modal choice during the journey to work, and addresses what factors in¯uence modal choice, and whether people can be moved out of their cars to other more sustainable forms of transport. The results of surveys of the commuting habits of employees at two UK companies are presented and compared with other relevant studies. Ninety-seven and 88% of staff at the respective companies travel to work by car. While only 2 and 7% of respondents cycled to work, real potential for cycling was identi®ed, given improvements in the cycling infrastructure. Similarly, while only 0 and 3% currently use public transport for the journey to work, improved services could see a signi®cant modal shift. Overall, there seemed to be genuine willingness to move out of the car for the journey to work, with one of the main barriers being a perception that the alternatives are not viable. Additionally, it appears many people live too far from the workplace to cycle or use public transport. q 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Commuting; Travel behaviour; Sustainable transport; Model choice
1. Introduction Everybody is, in some way, either directly or indirectly affected by transport. Its availability and accessibility dictates how, where and when we travel. Transport modal choice impacts many aspects of our lives including our work, leisure and health. Transport is a major social and environmental issue throughout the world. Recent years have seen a huge rise in levels of car ownership. In the 15 EU countries, the number of cars per 1000 people has risen from 184 in 1970 to 451 in 1997 (Eurostat, 2000). A majority of households have access to at least one car and many have more than one, with UK data showing over 25% of households have at least two cars (DETR, 1998a). Access to a car is now regarded by many as essential, even among those who cannot drive, with a survey of 14±16-year-olds ®nding that 61% of respondents view cars as essential to their lives (Lex, 1999). The number of journeys made and kilometres driven by car are increasing with car travel in the UK accounting for 86% of passenger kilometres travelled in 1997 (DETR, 1998a). Many of these journeys are very short, with a quarter of all UK car journeys under 2 miles (DETR, 1998b). Goodwin (1995) suggests * Corresponding author. Present address: Department of Geography, University of Canterbury, Private Bag 4800, Christchurch, New Zealand. Tel.: 164-3-366-7001; fax: 164-3-364-2907. E-mail address: [email protected] (S. Kingham).
that although the majority of journeys could be undertaken by foot, bicycle or bus, people increasingly use cars. Road transport affects health in a number of ways, including road traf®c accidents, air and noise pollution, psychological wellbeing and health-related accessibility issues (BMA, 1997). A further consequence of the growth in the number of cars is traf®c congestion. In the UK, congestion costs billions of pounds each year (DETR, 1998b). It has been estimated that journey times in the rush-hour could lengthen by as much as 70% over the next 20 years in Britain's busiest towns (DETR, 1998c). In outer London drivers spend 20% of their journey time stationary during rush-hours, while in the centre one third of total journey time is spent at a standstill (DETR, 1998c). This situation is not unique to the major conurbations, with some country towns also being seen to grind to a halt through congestion. Public awareness of congestion is signi®cant with 45% of a recent survey of car drivers `very concerned about traf®c congestion' and 80% who think `congestion is very serious in London' (Lex, 1999). These ®ndings are con®rmed by a BBC commissioned survey that found that 65% of respondents agreed (38% agreeing strongly) that road congestion is a serious problem in their area (MORI, 1999). Although less emotive than health concerns and not easily quanti®able, people are aware of the problems of traf®c congestion. Despite the fact that levels of car ownership and use are increasing at a fast rate, not all people have access to a car. In the UK 30% of households have no regular use of a car
0967-070X/01/$ - see front matter q 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. PII: S 0967-070 X(01)00 005-1
152
S. Kingham et al. / Transport Policy 8 (2001) 151±160
(DETR, 1998a), a total of thirteen million people. This signi®cant percentage of the population does not have the bene®ts of car ownership. Not surprisingly, car ownership is strongly related to household income, with the lowest 20 % income group having over 60% of households with no car, while amongst those with the highest incomes only 6% have no car (DETR, 1998d). While the majority of people have greater car access, so the minority have become more marginalised. Not only are these people the economically poor, they are also the transport poor. A signi®cant contributor to the rise in road use is travel to work or commuter journeys. These journeys account for the greatest distances travelled of all journeys by individuals, over 1300 miles per year (DETR, 1998a). In the UK in 1998, 71% of all commuter journeys were made by car, compared to 13% for public transport, 11% for walking, 4% for bicycle and 1% for motorcycle (DETR, 1998a). This shows an increase over the previous decade in car commuters, and a decrease in walkers, cyclists and bus passengers (DETR, 1998d). Yet as a journey that is done routinely, the potential to travel by alternative non-car modes is greater than for less routine journeys. The SACTRA (1994) argument that new roads generate new traf®c is generally accepted by the UK public (MORI, 1999) as well as the government which is now setting about reducing road traf®c levels. The UK government White Paper, A New Deal for Transport: Better for Everyone, aims to `to create a better, more integrated transport system to tackle the problems of congestion and pollution' (DETR, 1998b). A variety of suggestions are made to improve transport; several of these relate to reducing the reliance on cars as the mode of travel to work. The European Commission also focuses on the need to support the development of sustainable forms of transport (EC, 1999). A key policy to reduce car dependence on the journey to work is the development of travel plans (also referred to as green travel/transport/commuter plans). The UK government de®nes a travel plan as `typically a package of practical measures to encourage staff to choose alternatives to single-occupancy car-use, to reduce the environmental impact of travel and to reduce the need to travel at all for their work' (DETR, 2000a). Examples of measures that an organisation may include as part of a travel plan include: setting up a car sharing scheme; providing cycle facilities; negotiating improved bus services; offering ¯exible-working practices; and restricting and/or charging for car parking (DETR, 2000a). There is increasing evidence that travel plans are being taken up by some organisations (a summary of examples is provided by the DETR, 2000b). The key to the success of them is the willingness of employees to take advantage of employers' measures. Research by Bradshaw (1997) identi®ed that most large employers (over 100 employees) viewed their role in staff travel was limited primarily to the provision of parking. Research by Rye and colleagues on large companies has focused on policies to aid the implementation of travel
plans (Rye, 1999a, 1999b; Potter et al., 1999). A key conclusion is that companies favour low cost policies and this could include tax incentives for companies implementing plans. Regulation to require them may be the most effective means to widespread implementation although this may be unpopular and potentially dif®cult to enforce. Coleman (2000) focusing on small employers (under 100 employees) examined their willingness to introduce travel plans. She concluded that there was limited awareness and understanding of the term `green commuter plan', that company policies generally promoted car use, and that despite some positive interest the majority of companies viewed the development of a travel plan as not high on their agenda. Based on her ®ndings, Coleman suggested that of greater initial importance is focusing on the practices of larger companies. While there has been research on individuals commuter travel decision making (for example Curtis and Headicar, 1997; de Palma and Rochat, 1999) less studies appear to have focused on the attitudes of speci®c company employees to attempts by their employers to impact their daily travel mode to work. The aim of this paper is to examine employees perceptions of their modal choice during the journey to work, and address whether they can be moved out of their cars to other more sustainable forms of transport. The potential effectiveness of travel plans are addressed in the light of the ®ndings. 2. Method Journey to work surveys were administered at two large (over 100 employees) companies in Hertfordshire, England (Kingham et al., 1998, 1999). Mitsubishi Electric Europe is an electronics company with 320 employees of which half are provided with a company car. The site is located on the southern fringe of Hat®eld away from public transport routes (only one bus route serves the site and the nearest train station is a 3-mile walk) and peripheral to the town. Matra BAe Dynamics is an aerospace engineering and research company employing 1800 people, based in an industrial area on the western side of Stevenage. A number of bus routes serve the site from local residential areas and a train station is 1 mile from the site and can be walked in 20 min. Stevenage has an extensive network of cycle paths designed in the 1950s that are currently poorly utilised. Matra BAe operate a limited company car policy (less than 10% of employees). In both organisations the motivation to collect data was site related travel problems including congestion problems, car parking pressure and planned expansion. The two companies are of research interest in that they are both signi®cant local employers, with limited non-car use for commuter journeys (Hobson, pers. comm., 1998; Harris, pers. comm., 1998). In addition the difference in company car policies offers an interesting comparison. The surveys were by self-completion questionnaire with a combination of revealed preference and stated
S. Kingham et al. / Transport Policy 8 (2001) 151±160
153
Fig. 1. Usual mode of travel to work (percentage of all respondents).
preference questions being employed (Kroes and Sheldon, 1988; Wardman, 1988). While, stated preference questions are open to criticism that stated preferences will not be adhered to if the transport situation were to change, research suggests that they can be a reliable indicator of likely travel behaviour (Louviere and Hensher, 2000). The questionnaires was piloted before distribution and amended accordingly. The questionnaires were divided into six sections: peoples travel habits to work (modal choice and reason why); car sharing (attitudes to); public transport (attitudes and perceptions of quality); cycling; general transport issues (environmental knowledge); and, personal details and vehicle information. The survey was promoted (and reminders issued) within both companies using internal newsletters, noticeboards and email distribution lists. Surveys were delivered attached to employees payslips, and returned using internal mail. A prize was offered as an incentive. Mitsubishi Electric questionnaires were distributed in late1998, with 131 returned (41% response); while those for Matra BAe were distributed in early-1999 with 831 returned (46% response). Communication with Facilities Management staff at both companies (Hobson, pers. comm., 1998; Harris, pers. comm., 1998) suggested that age, gender, primary mode of travel to work, and nature of employment for respondents were similar to total employers. This suggested our survey respondents were representative of company employees. Additional data from two unpublished transport surveys of employees of organisations in Hertfordshire (Glaxo Wellcome, Stevenage, June 1998 and University of Hertfordshire, June 1997) were made available to the authors. Results for these and other studies were compared to recommendations from the UK Government White Paper on Transport.
3. Results 3.1. Mode of travel to work Respondents' main mode of travel to work is presented in Fig. 1. Some noticeable differences can be seen between the two companies. Matra BAe had 88% of the respondents travelling by car (9% using company cars), while 97.5% of the Mitsubishi respondents travelled to work by car (half using company cars). The different levels of company car use re¯ect different policies in the two companies. 50% of Mitsubishi employees having a company car (Hobson, pers. comm., 1998), while at Matra BAe, there is a ¯eet of cars owned by the company but these are not routinely available for private use by employees (Harris, pers. comm., 1998). Public transport and cycle use is also slightly different. In Mitsubishi, there were two cyclists, one walker and no public transport users. This re¯ects the lack of public transport access and the poor facilities for pedestrians and cyclists (limited footpaths or cycle paths to the site). The location of Matra BAe in Stevenage is within a good network of cycle paths and there is some, albeit limited, bus transport access. This is re¯ected in the slightly better ®gures of 3% public transport use (this includes train, which is also more accessible) and 7% cyclists and walkers. It is also worth noting that both companies have at some point in their history been relocated to their current sites. Mitsubishi moved 10 years previously from a site about 8 miles away and, consequently, it could be suggested that staff may well still be travelling from homes near to the previous location which may impact their modal choice. However analysis of home location shows no signi®cant numbers of employees commuting from near the previous site. Matra BAe moved 40 years earlier from a site 8 miles away, and until 1996
154
S. Kingham et al. / Transport Policy 8 (2001) 151±160
Fig. 2. Measures that would help employees to reduce their use of the car for their journey to/from work (percentage of respondents who drove to work).
operated a bus service from there to Stevenage. However, it is unlikely many current staff will be affected by this, a fact borne out by few staff travelling from near the previous site. 3.2. Alternative transport modes 3.2.1. Cycling When asked what measures would help employees reduce their car use for travel to work, improving the infrastructure for cyclists received less than 10% positive responses (Fig. 2) suggesting that improving the cycle infrastructure will have little impact on cycle commuting. Other studies show more varied results. Few people at the University of Hertfordshire (2%) would be encouraged from their cars by improved cycle paths, although the ®gure is slightly higher for Glaxo Wellcome respondents (13%). A further question asked employees to imagine that they lived within cycling distance of work (this was intentionally left subjective to allow for different levels of ®tness etc. between respondents) and owned a bike. The frequencies of cycling under current circumstances and accessibility assumptions are presented in Fig. 3. These ®gures show a different picture if employees were to live close to their place of work and own a bicycle. A majority of respondents would cycle occasionally and over a quarter at Matra BAE and 15% at Mitsubishi would cycle regularly all year (Fig. 3). When asked about which improvements would encourage them to cycle (Fig. 4) ®nancial incentives would encourage a quarter of car commuting respondents while loans to buy a bicycle were of limited interest. Signi®cant numbers of respondents indicated positively that improved cycle paths and facilities, as well as less traf®c on roads would encourage them to cycle to work. This is contrary
to the results in Fig. 2 which suggest that improved cycling facilities would have little impact on change mode. This suggests that people may have a desire to cycle to work, but live too far from the work place to do so. There is an interest in cycling if it were an accessible option. With twothirds of respondents at both companies having access to a bicycle and few indicating loans for a bicycle as an encouragement, we can generally rule out bicycle access as a hindrance to cycle use. Proximity to site is more relevant. Only 27.9% of Mitsubishi respondents and 41.8% of Matra BAe respondents consider they live close enough to cycle. Consequently, one positive policy to achieve more cycle commuters would be to encourage people to live nearer to their place of work. This is dif®cult to legislate for although some posts, including people who may be on call, often have location requirements included in contracts. In addition it may be possible to link the availability of relocation costs for eligible, newly appointed staff on the basis of some form of distance-to-work criteria. Additionally an improvement in cycle paths and facilities, and a reduction in levels of traf®c could reap positive bene®ts. These ®ndings are backed up a survey by Boots Plc of staff travel habits at their Nottingham site, which concluded that if improvements were made 23% of people would cycle to work (Boots Plc, 1998). 3.2.2. Public transport Data on public transport was collected by asking which changes would encourage people to use public transport for commuter journeys (Fig. 5) (results for car commuters only are shown). Frequency, reliability, convenient drop off sites, better connections and discount tickets were the features which over 40% of car commuting respondents indicated
S. Kingham et al. / Transport Policy 8 (2001) 151±160
155
Fig. 3. Proportion of employees who currently cycle to work, and those who would if they lived close enough and owned a bike, by frequency (percentage of all respondents) (Mitsubishi n 131; Matra BAe n 831).
may encourage them to shift to using public transport for their journey to work. Security, more comfortable vehicles and better information were less important factors (less than 25% of respondents). From these surveys we can see that people are most interested in a reliable and convenient public transport service, a fact supported by the Boots survey (Boots Plc, 1998). Two of the key features of the Transport White Paper, security and better information, were the least in¯uential factors.
An associated question asked people if they did not currently use public transport for work now, would they do so if improvements were made. Thirty-eight percent of Mitsubishi employees said they would consider doing so, while at Matra BAe, 17% said they would and 57% said they would `possibly'. A similar question at Boots Plc found that 45% of staff would consider travelling by train, and 53% by bus if services were more reliable and convenient (Boots Plc, 1998).
Fig. 4. Proportion employees who would be encouraged to cycle to work if they lived close enough and owned a bike if certain measures were implemented (percentage of respondents who drove to work).
156
S. Kingham et al. / Transport Policy 8 (2001) 151±160
Fig. 5. Measures that would encourage employees to use public transport to travel to/from work (percentage of respondents who drove to work).
3.2.3. Car sharing Currently at Mitsubishi 4% of respondents always car share and 20% sometimes do, while of the remainder who never car share, 57% indicated they would consider it. For Matra BAe, 7% always car share, and 20% sometimes do, while of those who never car share, 45% indicated they would be prepared to. This indicates that there is potential for car sharing. Nearly a quarter of both companies car commuting respondents indicated that help with car sharing might encourage them to reduce car commuting (Fig. 2). These ®gures are even higher for the University of Hertfordshire (34%), Glaxo Wellcome (54%) and Boots (46%). This suggests that car sharing may be part of the key to reducing the numbers of cars on the road during the rush-hour time. People seem to be attracted by the thought of staying in a car, while helping to reduce congestion. More detailed analysis of car sharing potential at Mitsubishi and Matra BAe was undertaken. This involved asking respondents to indicate how important speci®c measures would be in encouraging them to car share (Fig. 6). Car commuting responses indicate that well over half of them think it important or very important for certain car-sharing incentives to be in place to encourage them to car share. This is of particular relevance when we ®nd that over one third of respondents in both companies would be likely or very likely to car share if these signi®cant improvements were made (Fig. 7). Again this seems to con®rm a point previously made, that there is a de®nite interest in car sharing. 3.3. Increase in fuel price A further way to encourage people out of their cars is to
make car travel more expensive. One way to do this is to increase the price of fuel. A question related to this asked respondents `What fuel (petrol/diesel) price per litre would stop you using your car to travel to work?' Tick box options were £1, £1.50, £2, £5 and £10 per litre, `I would use my car whatever the price of fuel' and `Don't use a car for work anyway'. Results for car driving commuters are presented in Table 1. Only 12% (Mitsubishi) and 20% (Matra BAe) of respondents would stop using their car if petrol increased to £1.50 per litre (a doubling of fuel priceÐcurrent price was approx. 67p per litre). Forty-nine percent of Mitsubishi and 30% of Matra BAe respondents ticked the `other' option. At Mitsubishi three-quarters of the `other' responses were company car drivers, who indicated that the company paid for fuel, and, therefore, it was not a decision they would have to make. At Matra BAe company car drivers accounted for 34 out of the 224 `other' respondents. A further signi®cantly popular `other' response indicated the decision would
Table 1 Respondents indicating what fuel price would stop them using their car to travel to work (percentage of respondents who drove to work) Petrol price
Mitsubishi (n 123)
Matra BAe (n 681)
£1 per litre £1.50 per litre £2 per litre £5 per litre £10 per litre Other comments I would use my car whatever the price of fuel No response
4 8 13 16 2 49 0 8
6 14 17 16 5 30 0 12
S. Kingham et al. / Transport Policy 8 (2001) 151±160
157
Fig. 6. Importance of measures that would encourage employees to car share to travel to/from work (percentage of respondents who drove to work). (a) Mitsubishi (n 123); (b) Matra BAe (n 681).
Fig. 7. Likelihood of car sharing if signi®cant improvements were made among respondents who drove to work (percentage of respondents who drove to work).
158
S. Kingham et al. / Transport Policy 8 (2001) 151±160
be largely dependent on the relative cost of other available transport modes. This suggests that increasing the cost of car driving through fuel pricing is unlikely to reduce car use, at least if not accompanied by improved and relatively cheaper alternatives. This ®nding was backed up by the Glaxo survey which found that only 1% of respondents indicated increased fuel prices as one of their top ®ve (out of a list of 12) changes that would encourage them to use public transport. 4. Discussion The reported surveys found that over 85% of employees travelled to work by car. This level of car usage, while higher than national ®gures, is not unusual; the vast majority of people travel to work by car. Moving people to alternative modes is a great challenge to government, companies and individuals. The surveys reported in this paper attempted to identify how willing people are to shift their commuter transport mode and the factors that may encourage people to do this. This research suggests that improving cycle routes and changing facilities would encourage a relatively small percentage of staff to cycle to work. On the face of it, people do not seem particularly interested in cycling as a form of commuter travel. However further analysis of the data reveals that people are interested in cycling to work if they lived close enough to cycle. The number of people in both companies who would cycle regularly, in summer only or occasionally would increase six-fold if they lived close enough to their workplace (Fig. 3). Under these idealised circumstances, around 50% of respondents would be encouraged to cycle given improved cycle routes and a similar number given improved changing facilities and improved cycle security. These ®gures are similar to those reported elsewhere (MORI, 1999) where 55% of respondents would be encouraged by better cycling facilities, although it is unclear whether the distance to work criteria is accounted for. Ironically, a signi®cant percentage of people would cycle to work if there were less traf®c on the roads. In terms of policy what does this potential interest in cycling mean? Firstly, in companies where a signi®cant proportion of the workforce live close to their place of work, it is worthwhile promoting and investing in cycling as a commuter mode. Creating or improving changing facilities and secure cycle storage facilities would promote cycling use, as would the development of safer cycle routes. Secondly, encouraging newly appointed staff to live closer to the workplace is also potentially bene®cial. This latter proposal may seem somewhat draconian, but does exist for some organisations and could reap valuable rewards. Whatever mode people choose to travel to work by, shorter commuter journeys are always bene®cial in terms of congestion and pollution.
Few survey respondents used public transport as their main mode of travel to work (Fig. 1). Yet, as with cycling a significant proportion of respondents would consider getting the bus or train to work if improvements to services were made. The most popular improvements wanted by respondents related to the ef®ciency of the service (frequency and reliability of service, better connections and convenient drop off points) and discount passes or tickets. Of less interest were better security, cleaner and more comfortable vehicles and better public transport information. As with cycling there is potential for increased public transport use. The key factors that will encourage people to switch mode are the quality of service. A frequent, reliable, convenient and cheap public transport system may be able to attract a signi®cant number of people from their cars. These ®ndings are con®rmed by the BBC survey that found that improved reliability, frequency and cost of services would have the most impact on uptake of usage (MORI, 1999). Better quality vehicles, improved security and better information will have a more limited impact on public transport uptake. The BBC survey generally con®rms these ®ndings although personal security rates higher than vehicle quality and information provision. However, the provision of timetables at work was viewed as a positive factor in discouraging people to drive to work by over half the respondents (MORI, 1999). The overall potential for public transport use is con®rmed by the Lex Report (1999) that found that 43% of car drivers would use the car less if public transport were better, and the BBC survey that found that a majority of respondents would travel less by car if public transport services were better (MORI, 1999). The third alternative mode looked at in detail was car sharing. Currently around 5% of survey respondents regularly car share and 20% sometimes do. Of those who currently never car share, around half would consider it. These ®gures suggest great potential for car sharing as a way of reducing commuter traf®c. People seem attracted to the idea of reducing their car use for commuting while still travelling by car. A number of measures would encourage people to car share (Fig. 6). Help in ®nding car share partners was a popular measure with nearly 50% of respondents in both surveys rating it as very important in encouraging them to car share. This suggests that people are not aware of whom they may car share with, but that if this information was available to them then they would consider doing it. Car share computer programs are available that enable this information to be easily gained. The survey results suggest these would be a good investment. A free taxi home if let down by the driver was a second popular measure. This suggests people view car sharing as unreliable and would consider it more favourably if some of this reliability were removed. Finally ®nancial incentives or rewards although not as popular, were seen as important or very important by over half the respondents. If the suggested measures were implemented what
S. Kingham et al. / Transport Policy 8 (2001) 151±160
proportion of respondents would consider car sharing. Our survey suggests that about 40% of respondents would be likely or very likely to car share if signi®cant improvements were made (Fig. 7). This is a potentially sizeable modal shift. Even if only a quarter of these actually did change their mode that would still see a 10% decrease in car usage, a signi®cant change. Car sharing appears to have real potential as a way of shifting commuter mode from single occupancy car use. What our surveys have found is that cycling, public transport and car sharing all show great potential as alternative commuter modes. Survey respondents were interested in all three if changes or improvements were made to make them more attractive. Even is only a small proportion of those respondents who indicated interest actually changed their mode a signi®cant number of cars could be lost from the roads in rush-hour times. A small increase in cycle use, together with similar changes in public transport use and car sharing could all add up to a signi®cant reduction in traf®c on the roads. While several of the proposals investigated have suggested ®nancial incentives or rewards would encourage people to change commuter mode, increasing price of fuel is unlikely to persuade people to change from car use (Table 1). Only a relatively small proportion of respondents indicated that a rise in price to £1 a litre would encourage them to change, while half of the respondents indicated a price of £10 per litre would. The reason for this is partly attributed to the issue of company car use. Ninety-seven percent of Mitsubishi respondents used the car to travel to work, yet over half of these were company car drivers. When asked about the impact of raising the price of fuel, over 40% of Mitsubishi respondents indicated it would make no difference to them as the company paid for the fuel. This strongly suggests that as long as companies provide free cars and fuel people are unlikely to be persuaded to leave their cars at home for the journey to work. If the company gives someone a car they are unlikely to travel to work by any other mode. A ®rst obvious step to reducing car commuting is to reduce the provision of company cars and fuel. Increasing fuel price as a means of to reducing fuel use is not a new policy. The UK government is currently increasing fuel duty annually by at least 5% in real terms as the main way of achieving the 1992 Rio Summit targets for stabilising CO2 emissions (Banister, 1997). The Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (1994) suggested doubling fuel price by 2005 (equivalent to an increase of 9% pa). Yet our survey ®ndings suggest that price rises well in excess of these will still have a limited impact, at least if not accompanied by alternative mode incentives. Home or tele working is a way of reducing the need to commute to work. Although not really addressed in this study, one question asked whether people would be interested in working from home (Fig. 2). Nearly half the respondents of both companies indicated that they would be interested in it. Although unsuitable for many workplaces,
159
even small amounts of home working can aid a reduction in car commuter journeys. 5. Conclusions It is clear that people are aware of both pollution and congestion because of excessive car use and that people are prepared to act to improve the situation. There is a willingness to use alternatives to the car for the journey to work if the conditions are right. There is real potential for an increase in cycling and public transport for commuter journeys. However, this is only likely to occur if there are significant improvements in provision for both. Even when focusing only on car commuters (whose mode needs to be changed to affect any real progress) there is still a willingness and potential for improvement. One stumbling block to seeing a modal shift for commuter journeys is the fact that many people live far from their workplace. This severely reduces the potential for cycle commuting. Additionally it greatly hampers the likelihood for a modal shift to public transport, as travelling over long distances especially by bus can be dif®cult and time consuming. To achieve substantial changes in commuter mode away from the car will require people to live closer to the workplace. This is a much wider issue than transport planning. Some organisations require staff to live close to work as part of their job. An alternative may be to encourage people to live closer. Additionally ®nancial incentives could be offered. Eligibility for relocation packages often includes a requirement that the employee live within a certain distance of the workplace. If this distance were close enough for cycling or public transport this would increase the likelihood of commuting by this mode. Irrespective of the mode chosen, the closer people live to work the shorter the journey travelled, which on its own results in an undoubted environmental bene®t. Finally, this paper has shown that there is scope for growth in a number of alternatives to the single occupant car for commuter journeys. Cycling, public transport, car sharing and home working all have potential to take the burden off the roads. It is probably not realistic to affect signi®cant changes in one area. However, it is possible to affect a large change in modal shift by adding up a number of small changes. A small increase in cycle usage together with more car sharing, more public transport use and increased home working could signi®cantly reduce the amount of traf®c on the roads. Additionally getting a lot of people to change their mode occasionally could also have a signi®cant impact on traf®c levels and the associated congestion and pollution. References Banister, D., 1997. Reducing the need to travel. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 24, 437±449.
160
S. Kingham et al. / Transport Policy 8 (2001) 151±160
Boots Plc, 1998. Boots 1998 Travel Survey Summary Report. The Boots Company Plc., Nottingham. Bradshaw, R., 1997. Employers views on staff travel issues. Mobility strategy applications in the community. Transport Studies Group, University of Westminster, London. British Medical Association (BMA), 1997. Road Transport and Health. BMA, London. Coleman, C., 2000. Green commuter plans and the small employer: an investigation into the attitudes and policy of the small employer towards staff travel and green commuter plans. Transport Policy 7, 139±148. Curtis, C., Headicar, P., 1997. Targetting travel awarness campaigns: which individuals are more likley to switch from car to other transport for the journey to work. Transport Policy 4 (1), 57±65. De Palma, A., Rochat, D., 1999. Understanding individual travel decisions: results from a commuters survey in Geneva. Transportation 26, 263± 281. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR), 1998a. Transport Statistics Great Britain 1998. The Stationery Of®ce, London. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR), 1998b. A New Deal for Transport: Better for Everyone, the Governments White Paper on the Future of Transport. The Stationery Of®ce. London. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR), 1998c. Traf®c Speeds in Central and Outer London: 1996±97, Statistics Bulletin (98) 17. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR), 1998d. Focus on Personal Travel. 1998 ed. The Stationery Of®ce, London. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR), 2000a. Travel Plans. (Available at http://www.local-transport.detr. gov.uk/travelplans/index.htm) Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR), 2000b. The Bene®ts of Green Transport Plans: a literature review. (Available at http://www.local-transport.detr.gov.uk/travelplans/ literature/index.htm) European Commission (EC), 1999. The Common Transport Policy. Sustainable Mobility: Perspectives for the Future. Commission communication to the Council, European Parliament, Economic and Social Committee and Committee of the Regions. EC DG VII, Brussels. Eurostat, 2000. EU Transport in Figures. Statistical pocket book 2000. EC
DG VII, Eurostat. Brussels. (Available at europa.eu.int/comm/transport/tif/index.htm) Goodwin, P. (Ed.), 1995. Car dependence, A report for the RAC Foundation for Motoring and the Environment by ESRC Transport Studies Unit, University of Oxford with RDC Inc, San Francisco. Harris, I., 1998. Personal communication with Ian Harris, Facilities Manager, Matra BAe Dynamics, Stevenage. Hobson J, 1998. Personal communication with James Hobson, Facilities Manager, Mitsubishi Electric Europe, Hat®eld. Kingham, S., Dickinson, J., Copsey, S., 1998. Analysis of travel habits, attitudes and perceptions of Mitsubishi Electric employees. Report (Ref # SEEC-11-1998-02) prepared for Mitsubishi Electric UK. Kingham, S., Dickinson, J., Copsey, S., 1999. Travel habits, attitudes and perceptions of Matra BAe Dynamics employees. Report (Ref # SEEC04-1999-03) prepared for Matra BAe Dynamics. Kroes, E., Sheldon, R., 1991. Stated preference methods. An introduction. Journal of Transport Policy and Economics 22 (1), 11±25. Lex, 1999. The 1999 Lex Report on Motoring. Lex Service Plc. (Available at www.lex.co.uk/lrom.html) Louviere, J., Hensher, D., 2000. Combining sources of preference data. Presentation to the 9th International Association for Travel Behaviour Research Conference, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia, July 2000. Market and Opinion Research International (MORI), 1999. Attitudes to Transport. Summary Report. Research Study Conducted for BBC Broadcast. Jan±Feb 1999. MORI. Potter, S., Rye, T., Smith, M., 1999. Tax and green transport plans: a survey of UK experience. Transport Policy 6, 197±205. Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, 1994. Eighteenth Report: Transport and the Environment. Chairman Sir J Houghton. HMSO. London. Rye, T., 1999a. Employer transport plansÐa case for regulation? Transport Reviews 19 (1), 13±31. Rye, T., 1999b. Employer attitudes to employer transport plans: a comparison of UK and Dutch experience. Transport Policy 6, 183±196. SACTRA, 1994. Trunk Roads and the Generation of Traf®c. Standing Advisory Committee on Trunk Road Appraisal, Chairman D Wood. HMSO. London. Wardman, M., 1988. A comparison of revealed preference and stated preference models of travel behaviour. Journal of Transport Policy and Economics 22 (1), 71±91.
Transport Policy 8 (2001) 151±160
www.elsevier.com/locate/tranpol
Travelling to work: will people move out of their cars S. Kingham*, J. Dickinson, S Copsey Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Hertfordshire, College Lane, Hat®eld, Herts AS10 9AB, UK Received 1 August 1999; revised 1 December 1999; accepted 1 January 2001
Abstract This paper examines employee's perceptions of their modal choice during the journey to work, and addresses what factors in¯uence modal choice, and whether people can be moved out of their cars to other more sustainable forms of transport. The results of surveys of the commuting habits of employees at two UK companies are presented and compared with other relevant studies. Ninety-seven and 88% of staff at the respective companies travel to work by car. While only 2 and 7% of respondents cycled to work, real potential for cycling was identi®ed, given improvements in the cycling infrastructure. Similarly, while only 0 and 3% currently use public transport for the journey to work, improved services could see a signi®cant modal shift. Overall, there seemed to be genuine willingness to move out of the car for the journey to work, with one of the main barriers being a perception that the alternatives are not viable. Additionally, it appears many people live too far from the workplace to cycle or use public transport. q 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Commuting; Travel behaviour; Sustainable transport; Model choice
1. Introduction Everybody is, in some way, either directly or indirectly affected by transport. Its availability and accessibility dictates how, where and when we travel. Transport modal choice impacts many aspects of our lives including our work, leisure and health. Transport is a major social and environmental issue throughout the world. Recent years have seen a huge rise in levels of car ownership. In the 15 EU countries, the number of cars per 1000 people has risen from 184 in 1970 to 451 in 1997 (Eurostat, 2000). A majority of households have access to at least one car and many have more than one, with UK data showing over 25% of households have at least two cars (DETR, 1998a). Access to a car is now regarded by many as essential, even among those who cannot drive, with a survey of 14±16-year-olds ®nding that 61% of respondents view cars as essential to their lives (Lex, 1999). The number of journeys made and kilometres driven by car are increasing with car travel in the UK accounting for 86% of passenger kilometres travelled in 1997 (DETR, 1998a). Many of these journeys are very short, with a quarter of all UK car journeys under 2 miles (DETR, 1998b). Goodwin (1995) suggests * Corresponding author. Present address: Department of Geography, University of Canterbury, Private Bag 4800, Christchurch, New Zealand. Tel.: 164-3-366-7001; fax: 164-3-364-2907. E-mail address: [email protected] (S. Kingham).
that although the majority of journeys could be undertaken by foot, bicycle or bus, people increasingly use cars. Road transport affects health in a number of ways, including road traf®c accidents, air and noise pollution, psychological wellbeing and health-related accessibility issues (BMA, 1997). A further consequence of the growth in the number of cars is traf®c congestion. In the UK, congestion costs billions of pounds each year (DETR, 1998b). It has been estimated that journey times in the rush-hour could lengthen by as much as 70% over the next 20 years in Britain's busiest towns (DETR, 1998c). In outer London drivers spend 20% of their journey time stationary during rush-hours, while in the centre one third of total journey time is spent at a standstill (DETR, 1998c). This situation is not unique to the major conurbations, with some country towns also being seen to grind to a halt through congestion. Public awareness of congestion is signi®cant with 45% of a recent survey of car drivers `very concerned about traf®c congestion' and 80% who think `congestion is very serious in London' (Lex, 1999). These ®ndings are con®rmed by a BBC commissioned survey that found that 65% of respondents agreed (38% agreeing strongly) that road congestion is a serious problem in their area (MORI, 1999). Although less emotive than health concerns and not easily quanti®able, people are aware of the problems of traf®c congestion. Despite the fact that levels of car ownership and use are increasing at a fast rate, not all people have access to a car. In the UK 30% of households have no regular use of a car
0967-070X/01/$ - see front matter q 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. PII: S 0967-070 X(01)00 005-1
152
S. Kingham et al. / Transport Policy 8 (2001) 151±160
(DETR, 1998a), a total of thirteen million people. This signi®cant percentage of the population does not have the bene®ts of car ownership. Not surprisingly, car ownership is strongly related to household income, with the lowest 20 % income group having over 60% of households with no car, while amongst those with the highest incomes only 6% have no car (DETR, 1998d). While the majority of people have greater car access, so the minority have become more marginalised. Not only are these people the economically poor, they are also the transport poor. A signi®cant contributor to the rise in road use is travel to work or commuter journeys. These journeys account for the greatest distances travelled of all journeys by individuals, over 1300 miles per year (DETR, 1998a). In the UK in 1998, 71% of all commuter journeys were made by car, compared to 13% for public transport, 11% for walking, 4% for bicycle and 1% for motorcycle (DETR, 1998a). This shows an increase over the previous decade in car commuters, and a decrease in walkers, cyclists and bus passengers (DETR, 1998d). Yet as a journey that is done routinely, the potential to travel by alternative non-car modes is greater than for less routine journeys. The SACTRA (1994) argument that new roads generate new traf®c is generally accepted by the UK public (MORI, 1999) as well as the government which is now setting about reducing road traf®c levels. The UK government White Paper, A New Deal for Transport: Better for Everyone, aims to `to create a better, more integrated transport system to tackle the problems of congestion and pollution' (DETR, 1998b). A variety of suggestions are made to improve transport; several of these relate to reducing the reliance on cars as the mode of travel to work. The European Commission also focuses on the need to support the development of sustainable forms of transport (EC, 1999). A key policy to reduce car dependence on the journey to work is the development of travel plans (also referred to as green travel/transport/commuter plans). The UK government de®nes a travel plan as `typically a package of practical measures to encourage staff to choose alternatives to single-occupancy car-use, to reduce the environmental impact of travel and to reduce the need to travel at all for their work' (DETR, 2000a). Examples of measures that an organisation may include as part of a travel plan include: setting up a car sharing scheme; providing cycle facilities; negotiating improved bus services; offering ¯exible-working practices; and restricting and/or charging for car parking (DETR, 2000a). There is increasing evidence that travel plans are being taken up by some organisations (a summary of examples is provided by the DETR, 2000b). The key to the success of them is the willingness of employees to take advantage of employers' measures. Research by Bradshaw (1997) identi®ed that most large employers (over 100 employees) viewed their role in staff travel was limited primarily to the provision of parking. Research by Rye and colleagues on large companies has focused on policies to aid the implementation of travel
plans (Rye, 1999a, 1999b; Potter et al., 1999). A key conclusion is that companies favour low cost policies and this could include tax incentives for companies implementing plans. Regulation to require them may be the most effective means to widespread implementation although this may be unpopular and potentially dif®cult to enforce. Coleman (2000) focusing on small employers (under 100 employees) examined their willingness to introduce travel plans. She concluded that there was limited awareness and understanding of the term `green commuter plan', that company policies generally promoted car use, and that despite some positive interest the majority of companies viewed the development of a travel plan as not high on their agenda. Based on her ®ndings, Coleman suggested that of greater initial importance is focusing on the practices of larger companies. While there has been research on individuals commuter travel decision making (for example Curtis and Headicar, 1997; de Palma and Rochat, 1999) less studies appear to have focused on the attitudes of speci®c company employees to attempts by their employers to impact their daily travel mode to work. The aim of this paper is to examine employees perceptions of their modal choice during the journey to work, and address whether they can be moved out of their cars to other more sustainable forms of transport. The potential effectiveness of travel plans are addressed in the light of the ®ndings. 2. Method Journey to work surveys were administered at two large (over 100 employees) companies in Hertfordshire, England (Kingham et al., 1998, 1999). Mitsubishi Electric Europe is an electronics company with 320 employees of which half are provided with a company car. The site is located on the southern fringe of Hat®eld away from public transport routes (only one bus route serves the site and the nearest train station is a 3-mile walk) and peripheral to the town. Matra BAe Dynamics is an aerospace engineering and research company employing 1800 people, based in an industrial area on the western side of Stevenage. A number of bus routes serve the site from local residential areas and a train station is 1 mile from the site and can be walked in 20 min. Stevenage has an extensive network of cycle paths designed in the 1950s that are currently poorly utilised. Matra BAe operate a limited company car policy (less than 10% of employees). In both organisations the motivation to collect data was site related travel problems including congestion problems, car parking pressure and planned expansion. The two companies are of research interest in that they are both signi®cant local employers, with limited non-car use for commuter journeys (Hobson, pers. comm., 1998; Harris, pers. comm., 1998). In addition the difference in company car policies offers an interesting comparison. The surveys were by self-completion questionnaire with a combination of revealed preference and stated
S. Kingham et al. / Transport Policy 8 (2001) 151±160
153
Fig. 1. Usual mode of travel to work (percentage of all respondents).
preference questions being employed (Kroes and Sheldon, 1988; Wardman, 1988). While, stated preference questions are open to criticism that stated preferences will not be adhered to if the transport situation were to change, research suggests that they can be a reliable indicator of likely travel behaviour (Louviere and Hensher, 2000). The questionnaires was piloted before distribution and amended accordingly. The questionnaires were divided into six sections: peoples travel habits to work (modal choice and reason why); car sharing (attitudes to); public transport (attitudes and perceptions of quality); cycling; general transport issues (environmental knowledge); and, personal details and vehicle information. The survey was promoted (and reminders issued) within both companies using internal newsletters, noticeboards and email distribution lists. Surveys were delivered attached to employees payslips, and returned using internal mail. A prize was offered as an incentive. Mitsubishi Electric questionnaires were distributed in late1998, with 131 returned (41% response); while those for Matra BAe were distributed in early-1999 with 831 returned (46% response). Communication with Facilities Management staff at both companies (Hobson, pers. comm., 1998; Harris, pers. comm., 1998) suggested that age, gender, primary mode of travel to work, and nature of employment for respondents were similar to total employers. This suggested our survey respondents were representative of company employees. Additional data from two unpublished transport surveys of employees of organisations in Hertfordshire (Glaxo Wellcome, Stevenage, June 1998 and University of Hertfordshire, June 1997) were made available to the authors. Results for these and other studies were compared to recommendations from the UK Government White Paper on Transport.
3. Results 3.1. Mode of travel to work Respondents' main mode of travel to work is presented in Fig. 1. Some noticeable differences can be seen between the two companies. Matra BAe had 88% of the respondents travelling by car (9% using company cars), while 97.5% of the Mitsubishi respondents travelled to work by car (half using company cars). The different levels of company car use re¯ect different policies in the two companies. 50% of Mitsubishi employees having a company car (Hobson, pers. comm., 1998), while at Matra BAe, there is a ¯eet of cars owned by the company but these are not routinely available for private use by employees (Harris, pers. comm., 1998). Public transport and cycle use is also slightly different. In Mitsubishi, there were two cyclists, one walker and no public transport users. This re¯ects the lack of public transport access and the poor facilities for pedestrians and cyclists (limited footpaths or cycle paths to the site). The location of Matra BAe in Stevenage is within a good network of cycle paths and there is some, albeit limited, bus transport access. This is re¯ected in the slightly better ®gures of 3% public transport use (this includes train, which is also more accessible) and 7% cyclists and walkers. It is also worth noting that both companies have at some point in their history been relocated to their current sites. Mitsubishi moved 10 years previously from a site about 8 miles away and, consequently, it could be suggested that staff may well still be travelling from homes near to the previous location which may impact their modal choice. However analysis of home location shows no signi®cant numbers of employees commuting from near the previous site. Matra BAe moved 40 years earlier from a site 8 miles away, and until 1996
154
S. Kingham et al. / Transport Policy 8 (2001) 151±160
Fig. 2. Measures that would help employees to reduce their use of the car for their journey to/from work (percentage of respondents who drove to work).
operated a bus service from there to Stevenage. However, it is unlikely many current staff will be affected by this, a fact borne out by few staff travelling from near the previous site. 3.2. Alternative transport modes 3.2.1. Cycling When asked what measures would help employees reduce their car use for travel to work, improving the infrastructure for cyclists received less than 10% positive responses (Fig. 2) suggesting that improving the cycle infrastructure will have little impact on cycle commuting. Other studies show more varied results. Few people at the University of Hertfordshire (2%) would be encouraged from their cars by improved cycle paths, although the ®gure is slightly higher for Glaxo Wellcome respondents (13%). A further question asked employees to imagine that they lived within cycling distance of work (this was intentionally left subjective to allow for different levels of ®tness etc. between respondents) and owned a bike. The frequencies of cycling under current circumstances and accessibility assumptions are presented in Fig. 3. These ®gures show a different picture if employees were to live close to their place of work and own a bicycle. A majority of respondents would cycle occasionally and over a quarter at Matra BAE and 15% at Mitsubishi would cycle regularly all year (Fig. 3). When asked about which improvements would encourage them to cycle (Fig. 4) ®nancial incentives would encourage a quarter of car commuting respondents while loans to buy a bicycle were of limited interest. Signi®cant numbers of respondents indicated positively that improved cycle paths and facilities, as well as less traf®c on roads would encourage them to cycle to work. This is contrary
to the results in Fig. 2 which suggest that improved cycling facilities would have little impact on change mode. This suggests that people may have a desire to cycle to work, but live too far from the work place to do so. There is an interest in cycling if it were an accessible option. With twothirds of respondents at both companies having access to a bicycle and few indicating loans for a bicycle as an encouragement, we can generally rule out bicycle access as a hindrance to cycle use. Proximity to site is more relevant. Only 27.9% of Mitsubishi respondents and 41.8% of Matra BAe respondents consider they live close enough to cycle. Consequently, one positive policy to achieve more cycle commuters would be to encourage people to live nearer to their place of work. This is dif®cult to legislate for although some posts, including people who may be on call, often have location requirements included in contracts. In addition it may be possible to link the availability of relocation costs for eligible, newly appointed staff on the basis of some form of distance-to-work criteria. Additionally an improvement in cycle paths and facilities, and a reduction in levels of traf®c could reap positive bene®ts. These ®ndings are backed up a survey by Boots Plc of staff travel habits at their Nottingham site, which concluded that if improvements were made 23% of people would cycle to work (Boots Plc, 1998). 3.2.2. Public transport Data on public transport was collected by asking which changes would encourage people to use public transport for commuter journeys (Fig. 5) (results for car commuters only are shown). Frequency, reliability, convenient drop off sites, better connections and discount tickets were the features which over 40% of car commuting respondents indicated
S. Kingham et al. / Transport Policy 8 (2001) 151±160
155
Fig. 3. Proportion of employees who currently cycle to work, and those who would if they lived close enough and owned a bike, by frequency (percentage of all respondents) (Mitsubishi n 131; Matra BAe n 831).
may encourage them to shift to using public transport for their journey to work. Security, more comfortable vehicles and better information were less important factors (less than 25% of respondents). From these surveys we can see that people are most interested in a reliable and convenient public transport service, a fact supported by the Boots survey (Boots Plc, 1998). Two of the key features of the Transport White Paper, security and better information, were the least in¯uential factors.
An associated question asked people if they did not currently use public transport for work now, would they do so if improvements were made. Thirty-eight percent of Mitsubishi employees said they would consider doing so, while at Matra BAe, 17% said they would and 57% said they would `possibly'. A similar question at Boots Plc found that 45% of staff would consider travelling by train, and 53% by bus if services were more reliable and convenient (Boots Plc, 1998).
Fig. 4. Proportion employees who would be encouraged to cycle to work if they lived close enough and owned a bike if certain measures were implemented (percentage of respondents who drove to work).
156
S. Kingham et al. / Transport Policy 8 (2001) 151±160
Fig. 5. Measures that would encourage employees to use public transport to travel to/from work (percentage of respondents who drove to work).
3.2.3. Car sharing Currently at Mitsubishi 4% of respondents always car share and 20% sometimes do, while of the remainder who never car share, 57% indicated they would consider it. For Matra BAe, 7% always car share, and 20% sometimes do, while of those who never car share, 45% indicated they would be prepared to. This indicates that there is potential for car sharing. Nearly a quarter of both companies car commuting respondents indicated that help with car sharing might encourage them to reduce car commuting (Fig. 2). These ®gures are even higher for the University of Hertfordshire (34%), Glaxo Wellcome (54%) and Boots (46%). This suggests that car sharing may be part of the key to reducing the numbers of cars on the road during the rush-hour time. People seem to be attracted by the thought of staying in a car, while helping to reduce congestion. More detailed analysis of car sharing potential at Mitsubishi and Matra BAe was undertaken. This involved asking respondents to indicate how important speci®c measures would be in encouraging them to car share (Fig. 6). Car commuting responses indicate that well over half of them think it important or very important for certain car-sharing incentives to be in place to encourage them to car share. This is of particular relevance when we ®nd that over one third of respondents in both companies would be likely or very likely to car share if these signi®cant improvements were made (Fig. 7). Again this seems to con®rm a point previously made, that there is a de®nite interest in car sharing. 3.3. Increase in fuel price A further way to encourage people out of their cars is to
make car travel more expensive. One way to do this is to increase the price of fuel. A question related to this asked respondents `What fuel (petrol/diesel) price per litre would stop you using your car to travel to work?' Tick box options were £1, £1.50, £2, £5 and £10 per litre, `I would use my car whatever the price of fuel' and `Don't use a car for work anyway'. Results for car driving commuters are presented in Table 1. Only 12% (Mitsubishi) and 20% (Matra BAe) of respondents would stop using their car if petrol increased to £1.50 per litre (a doubling of fuel priceÐcurrent price was approx. 67p per litre). Forty-nine percent of Mitsubishi and 30% of Matra BAe respondents ticked the `other' option. At Mitsubishi three-quarters of the `other' responses were company car drivers, who indicated that the company paid for fuel, and, therefore, it was not a decision they would have to make. At Matra BAe company car drivers accounted for 34 out of the 224 `other' respondents. A further signi®cantly popular `other' response indicated the decision would
Table 1 Respondents indicating what fuel price would stop them using their car to travel to work (percentage of respondents who drove to work) Petrol price
Mitsubishi (n 123)
Matra BAe (n 681)
£1 per litre £1.50 per litre £2 per litre £5 per litre £10 per litre Other comments I would use my car whatever the price of fuel No response
4 8 13 16 2 49 0 8
6 14 17 16 5 30 0 12
S. Kingham et al. / Transport Policy 8 (2001) 151±160
157
Fig. 6. Importance of measures that would encourage employees to car share to travel to/from work (percentage of respondents who drove to work). (a) Mitsubishi (n 123); (b) Matra BAe (n 681).
Fig. 7. Likelihood of car sharing if signi®cant improvements were made among respondents who drove to work (percentage of respondents who drove to work).
158
S. Kingham et al. / Transport Policy 8 (2001) 151±160
be largely dependent on the relative cost of other available transport modes. This suggests that increasing the cost of car driving through fuel pricing is unlikely to reduce car use, at least if not accompanied by improved and relatively cheaper alternatives. This ®nding was backed up by the Glaxo survey which found that only 1% of respondents indicated increased fuel prices as one of their top ®ve (out of a list of 12) changes that would encourage them to use public transport. 4. Discussion The reported surveys found that over 85% of employees travelled to work by car. This level of car usage, while higher than national ®gures, is not unusual; the vast majority of people travel to work by car. Moving people to alternative modes is a great challenge to government, companies and individuals. The surveys reported in this paper attempted to identify how willing people are to shift their commuter transport mode and the factors that may encourage people to do this. This research suggests that improving cycle routes and changing facilities would encourage a relatively small percentage of staff to cycle to work. On the face of it, people do not seem particularly interested in cycling as a form of commuter travel. However further analysis of the data reveals that people are interested in cycling to work if they lived close enough to cycle. The number of people in both companies who would cycle regularly, in summer only or occasionally would increase six-fold if they lived close enough to their workplace (Fig. 3). Under these idealised circumstances, around 50% of respondents would be encouraged to cycle given improved cycle routes and a similar number given improved changing facilities and improved cycle security. These ®gures are similar to those reported elsewhere (MORI, 1999) where 55% of respondents would be encouraged by better cycling facilities, although it is unclear whether the distance to work criteria is accounted for. Ironically, a signi®cant percentage of people would cycle to work if there were less traf®c on the roads. In terms of policy what does this potential interest in cycling mean? Firstly, in companies where a signi®cant proportion of the workforce live close to their place of work, it is worthwhile promoting and investing in cycling as a commuter mode. Creating or improving changing facilities and secure cycle storage facilities would promote cycling use, as would the development of safer cycle routes. Secondly, encouraging newly appointed staff to live closer to the workplace is also potentially bene®cial. This latter proposal may seem somewhat draconian, but does exist for some organisations and could reap valuable rewards. Whatever mode people choose to travel to work by, shorter commuter journeys are always bene®cial in terms of congestion and pollution.
Few survey respondents used public transport as their main mode of travel to work (Fig. 1). Yet, as with cycling a significant proportion of respondents would consider getting the bus or train to work if improvements to services were made. The most popular improvements wanted by respondents related to the ef®ciency of the service (frequency and reliability of service, better connections and convenient drop off points) and discount passes or tickets. Of less interest were better security, cleaner and more comfortable vehicles and better public transport information. As with cycling there is potential for increased public transport use. The key factors that will encourage people to switch mode are the quality of service. A frequent, reliable, convenient and cheap public transport system may be able to attract a signi®cant number of people from their cars. These ®ndings are con®rmed by the BBC survey that found that improved reliability, frequency and cost of services would have the most impact on uptake of usage (MORI, 1999). Better quality vehicles, improved security and better information will have a more limited impact on public transport uptake. The BBC survey generally con®rms these ®ndings although personal security rates higher than vehicle quality and information provision. However, the provision of timetables at work was viewed as a positive factor in discouraging people to drive to work by over half the respondents (MORI, 1999). The overall potential for public transport use is con®rmed by the Lex Report (1999) that found that 43% of car drivers would use the car less if public transport were better, and the BBC survey that found that a majority of respondents would travel less by car if public transport services were better (MORI, 1999). The third alternative mode looked at in detail was car sharing. Currently around 5% of survey respondents regularly car share and 20% sometimes do. Of those who currently never car share, around half would consider it. These ®gures suggest great potential for car sharing as a way of reducing commuter traf®c. People seem attracted to the idea of reducing their car use for commuting while still travelling by car. A number of measures would encourage people to car share (Fig. 6). Help in ®nding car share partners was a popular measure with nearly 50% of respondents in both surveys rating it as very important in encouraging them to car share. This suggests that people are not aware of whom they may car share with, but that if this information was available to them then they would consider doing it. Car share computer programs are available that enable this information to be easily gained. The survey results suggest these would be a good investment. A free taxi home if let down by the driver was a second popular measure. This suggests people view car sharing as unreliable and would consider it more favourably if some of this reliability were removed. Finally ®nancial incentives or rewards although not as popular, were seen as important or very important by over half the respondents. If the suggested measures were implemented what
S. Kingham et al. / Transport Policy 8 (2001) 151±160
proportion of respondents would consider car sharing. Our survey suggests that about 40% of respondents would be likely or very likely to car share if signi®cant improvements were made (Fig. 7). This is a potentially sizeable modal shift. Even if only a quarter of these actually did change their mode that would still see a 10% decrease in car usage, a signi®cant change. Car sharing appears to have real potential as a way of shifting commuter mode from single occupancy car use. What our surveys have found is that cycling, public transport and car sharing all show great potential as alternative commuter modes. Survey respondents were interested in all three if changes or improvements were made to make them more attractive. Even is only a small proportion of those respondents who indicated interest actually changed their mode a signi®cant number of cars could be lost from the roads in rush-hour times. A small increase in cycle use, together with similar changes in public transport use and car sharing could all add up to a signi®cant reduction in traf®c on the roads. While several of the proposals investigated have suggested ®nancial incentives or rewards would encourage people to change commuter mode, increasing price of fuel is unlikely to persuade people to change from car use (Table 1). Only a relatively small proportion of respondents indicated that a rise in price to £1 a litre would encourage them to change, while half of the respondents indicated a price of £10 per litre would. The reason for this is partly attributed to the issue of company car use. Ninety-seven percent of Mitsubishi respondents used the car to travel to work, yet over half of these were company car drivers. When asked about the impact of raising the price of fuel, over 40% of Mitsubishi respondents indicated it would make no difference to them as the company paid for the fuel. This strongly suggests that as long as companies provide free cars and fuel people are unlikely to be persuaded to leave their cars at home for the journey to work. If the company gives someone a car they are unlikely to travel to work by any other mode. A ®rst obvious step to reducing car commuting is to reduce the provision of company cars and fuel. Increasing fuel price as a means of to reducing fuel use is not a new policy. The UK government is currently increasing fuel duty annually by at least 5% in real terms as the main way of achieving the 1992 Rio Summit targets for stabilising CO2 emissions (Banister, 1997). The Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (1994) suggested doubling fuel price by 2005 (equivalent to an increase of 9% pa). Yet our survey ®ndings suggest that price rises well in excess of these will still have a limited impact, at least if not accompanied by alternative mode incentives. Home or tele working is a way of reducing the need to commute to work. Although not really addressed in this study, one question asked whether people would be interested in working from home (Fig. 2). Nearly half the respondents of both companies indicated that they would be interested in it. Although unsuitable for many workplaces,
159
even small amounts of home working can aid a reduction in car commuter journeys. 5. Conclusions It is clear that people are aware of both pollution and congestion because of excessive car use and that people are prepared to act to improve the situation. There is a willingness to use alternatives to the car for the journey to work if the conditions are right. There is real potential for an increase in cycling and public transport for commuter journeys. However, this is only likely to occur if there are significant improvements in provision for both. Even when focusing only on car commuters (whose mode needs to be changed to affect any real progress) there is still a willingness and potential for improvement. One stumbling block to seeing a modal shift for commuter journeys is the fact that many people live far from their workplace. This severely reduces the potential for cycle commuting. Additionally it greatly hampers the likelihood for a modal shift to public transport, as travelling over long distances especially by bus can be dif®cult and time consuming. To achieve substantial changes in commuter mode away from the car will require people to live closer to the workplace. This is a much wider issue than transport planning. Some organisations require staff to live close to work as part of their job. An alternative may be to encourage people to live closer. Additionally ®nancial incentives could be offered. Eligibility for relocation packages often includes a requirement that the employee live within a certain distance of the workplace. If this distance were close enough for cycling or public transport this would increase the likelihood of commuting by this mode. Irrespective of the mode chosen, the closer people live to work the shorter the journey travelled, which on its own results in an undoubted environmental bene®t. Finally, this paper has shown that there is scope for growth in a number of alternatives to the single occupant car for commuter journeys. Cycling, public transport, car sharing and home working all have potential to take the burden off the roads. It is probably not realistic to affect signi®cant changes in one area. However, it is possible to affect a large change in modal shift by adding up a number of small changes. A small increase in cycle usage together with more car sharing, more public transport use and increased home working could signi®cantly reduce the amount of traf®c on the roads. Additionally getting a lot of people to change their mode occasionally could also have a signi®cant impact on traf®c levels and the associated congestion and pollution. References Banister, D., 1997. Reducing the need to travel. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 24, 437±449.
160
S. Kingham et al. / Transport Policy 8 (2001) 151±160
Boots Plc, 1998. Boots 1998 Travel Survey Summary Report. The Boots Company Plc., Nottingham. Bradshaw, R., 1997. Employers views on staff travel issues. Mobility strategy applications in the community. Transport Studies Group, University of Westminster, London. British Medical Association (BMA), 1997. Road Transport and Health. BMA, London. Coleman, C., 2000. Green commuter plans and the small employer: an investigation into the attitudes and policy of the small employer towards staff travel and green commuter plans. Transport Policy 7, 139±148. Curtis, C., Headicar, P., 1997. Targetting travel awarness campaigns: which individuals are more likley to switch from car to other transport for the journey to work. Transport Policy 4 (1), 57±65. De Palma, A., Rochat, D., 1999. Understanding individual travel decisions: results from a commuters survey in Geneva. Transportation 26, 263± 281. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR), 1998a. Transport Statistics Great Britain 1998. The Stationery Of®ce, London. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR), 1998b. A New Deal for Transport: Better for Everyone, the Governments White Paper on the Future of Transport. The Stationery Of®ce. London. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR), 1998c. Traf®c Speeds in Central and Outer London: 1996±97, Statistics Bulletin (98) 17. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR), 1998d. Focus on Personal Travel. 1998 ed. The Stationery Of®ce, London. Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR), 2000a. Travel Plans. (Available at http://www.local-transport.detr. gov.uk/travelplans/index.htm) Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR), 2000b. The Bene®ts of Green Transport Plans: a literature review. (Available at http://www.local-transport.detr.gov.uk/travelplans/ literature/index.htm) European Commission (EC), 1999. The Common Transport Policy. Sustainable Mobility: Perspectives for the Future. Commission communication to the Council, European Parliament, Economic and Social Committee and Committee of the Regions. EC DG VII, Brussels. Eurostat, 2000. EU Transport in Figures. Statistical pocket book 2000. EC
DG VII, Eurostat. Brussels. (Available at europa.eu.int/comm/transport/tif/index.htm) Goodwin, P. (Ed.), 1995. Car dependence, A report for the RAC Foundation for Motoring and the Environment by ESRC Transport Studies Unit, University of Oxford with RDC Inc, San Francisco. Harris, I., 1998. Personal communication with Ian Harris, Facilities Manager, Matra BAe Dynamics, Stevenage. Hobson J, 1998. Personal communication with James Hobson, Facilities Manager, Mitsubishi Electric Europe, Hat®eld. Kingham, S., Dickinson, J., Copsey, S., 1998. Analysis of travel habits, attitudes and perceptions of Mitsubishi Electric employees. Report (Ref # SEEC-11-1998-02) prepared for Mitsubishi Electric UK. Kingham, S., Dickinson, J., Copsey, S., 1999. Travel habits, attitudes and perceptions of Matra BAe Dynamics employees. Report (Ref # SEEC04-1999-03) prepared for Matra BAe Dynamics. Kroes, E., Sheldon, R., 1991. Stated preference methods. An introduction. Journal of Transport Policy and Economics 22 (1), 11±25. Lex, 1999. The 1999 Lex Report on Motoring. Lex Service Plc. (Available at www.lex.co.uk/lrom.html) Louviere, J., Hensher, D., 2000. Combining sources of preference data. Presentation to the 9th International Association for Travel Behaviour Research Conference, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia, July 2000. Market and Opinion Research International (MORI), 1999. Attitudes to Transport. Summary Report. Research Study Conducted for BBC Broadcast. Jan±Feb 1999. MORI. Potter, S., Rye, T., Smith, M., 1999. Tax and green transport plans: a survey of UK experience. Transport Policy 6, 197±205. Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, 1994. Eighteenth Report: Transport and the Environment. Chairman Sir J Houghton. HMSO. London. Rye, T., 1999a. Employer transport plansÐa case for regulation? Transport Reviews 19 (1), 13±31. Rye, T., 1999b. Employer attitudes to employer transport plans: a comparison of UK and Dutch experience. Transport Policy 6, 183±196. SACTRA, 1994. Trunk Roads and the Generation of Traf®c. Standing Advisory Committee on Trunk Road Appraisal, Chairman D Wood. HMSO. London. Wardman, M., 1988. A comparison of revealed preference and stated preference models of travel behaviour. Journal of Transport Policy and Economics 22 (1), 71±91.