- Email: [email protected]
Deep subterranean railway system: Acceptability assessment of the public discourse in the Seoul Metropolitan Area of South Korea
Transportation Research Part A 77 (2015) 82–94
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Transportation Research Part A journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tra
Deep subterranean railway system: Acceptability assessment of the public discourse in the Seoul Metropolitan Area of South Korea Younshik Chung 1, Hyun Kim ⇑ Korea Transport Institute, Sejong 339-007, Republic of Korea
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 7 February 2014 Received in revised form 30 March 2015 Accepted 14 April 2015 Available online 16 May 2015 Keywords: Subway system Deep subterranean railway system Acceptability analysis Public discourse Affective approach Structural equation modeling
a b s t r a c t The objective of this study is to analyze the public acceptability of deep subterranean railway systems, which will be constructed in the space 40 m below ground level and will be operated at twice the speed of the existing subway system. Although such railway systems have been feasible in terms of construction technologies and economics, public acceptability must be considered for the successful introduction of such a new public infrastructure. Therefore, to perform the analysis of public acceptability, a telephone-based survey was conducted for residents in the vicinity of the planned the deep subterranean railway systems. As a result, about 70% of the respondents answered that they took a neutral or opposing attitude to introducing the deep subterranean railway systems. Awareness of the deep subterranean railway systems has a positive impact on its acceptability. In addition, the acceptability is found to show a negative relationship with environment and inconvenience factors. Based on the analysis results, an affective approach through soft measures such as awareness campaigns and advertisements is recommended to effectively address and mitigate the concerns and issues raised by the public. Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction The construction of a new rail transportation system in an existing metropolitan area has to overcome various restrictions, which include land compensation issues, urban landscape issues, environmental issues such as noise and vibration, and conflict with road transportation systems. The subsurface use of public land such as urban roadways has been partly satisfied with such limitations. Based on this background, the Seoul Metropolitan Government has also constructed a subway transportation network along with the urban roadway network, and its length amounts to about 500 km. In addition, the daily and annual ridership of the subway transportation system in the Seoul Metropolitan Area is the third highest in the world, after that in the Tokyo Metropolitan Area, Japan and the Moscow Metropolitan area, Russia (Derrible and Kennedy, 2009). Despite the high ridership of the subway transportation system in the Seoul Metropolitan Area, the Korean Government is planning to extend the subway transportation systems to mitigate road traffic congestion as well as to cope with the global warming issue. That is, the current policy priority for the high and increasing ridership lies in constructing a high-speed
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +82 (44) 211 3135; fax: +82 (44) 211 3285. 1
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (Y. Chung), [email protected] (H. Kim). Tel.: +82 (44) 211 3243; fax: +82 (44) 211 3285.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2015.04.008 0965-8564/Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Y. Chung, H. Kim / Transportation Research Part A 77 (2015) 82–94
83
railway system to complement the service of the existing urban subway systems. However, underground space in the Seoul Metropolitan Area is already crowded with various types of facilities such as electricity cables and ducts, sewerage and water supplies, gas pipes, underground parking lots, and subways. Additionally, since a specific level of horizontal curve is required for the operation of the high-speed railway, the subway system construction along with the urban roadway network can restricts the speed of high-speed subway train. As a result, the Korean Government has been increasingly interested in the utilization of other spaces other than the subsurface of the urban roadways. One such space is ‘deep subterranean space’ defined as that space under 40 m of depth in which there is no need to compensate landowners of the surface space for the use of the underground space. However, the use of deep subterranean space could lead to the emotional uneasiness of system users due to safety and security worries, such as seismic activity,2 the fear of deep subterranean, and other disasters. In addition, it may be perceived as inconvenient to access and transfer to deep stations, and as environmentally annoying in terms of noise and vibration. The purpose of this study is therefore to analyze the public acceptability of the deep subterranean railway systems, prior to the planning project of its construction. 2. Literature review 2.1. Deep subterranean railway systems in urban areas After the introduction of the concept of the subterranean street by Webster (1914), significant advancements in construction technologies during the 20th century resulted in a boom in underground space development. These technologies include reinforced concrete, tunneling in soft ground and the creation of open underground excavations with minimum subsidence of adjacent ground (facilitated by sheet piling, bored piles, and diaphragm walls). The late 20th century especially benefitted from advancements in underground construction and geotechnical soil improvement technologies. These technological advancements not only led to the operation of deep subterranean railway systems to connect locations via underwater tunnels such as Seikan Tunnel in Japan in 1988 and Channel Tunnel between the United Kingdom and France in 1994 (Chow et al., 2002; Koyama, 1997), but also enabled progressive urban underground space development in densely populated city areas, including excavation of large caverns in the shallow subsurface. As a result, the use of urban underground space has been more intensive with such technological advancements as well as with increasing urban underground space congestion and land prices and other environmental issues. Urban underground space is functionally used for utilities and communications (e.g., water, sewerage, gas, electric cables), transportation (e.g., railways, roadways, pedestrian tunnels), storage (e.g., food, water, hazardous goods), industry (e.g., power plants), public use (e.g., shopping centers, hospitals, civil defense structures), and private and personal use (e.g., parking lots). According to research by Bobylev (2008), utilities and transportation are the most common functions of urban underground space. This study was based on three cities, Paris, Tokyo, and Stockholm, and the result showed that the cities used more than 32% of urban underground space for transportation. Specifically, the city of Tokyo showed 55% of underground space being for rail transportation at 43%. Thus, the depth in Tokyo metro lines has progressed from shallow ground layers to deeper layers, and recently, it has reached 50 m in depth (Bobylev, 2009; Goto, 2001; Takasaki et al., 2000). Recently, Li et al. (2013a) proposed a new paradigm of economic development: underground urbanism defined as an innovative concept for urban restructuring and a transformational construction practice. In this study, they introduced its concept, process, and application in the city of Geneva, Switzerland. Also, to formulate 3D zoning, they demonstrated a comprehensive evaluation methodology for underground resources beneath the municipality of Suzhou in China (Li et al., 2013b). In these two studies, they introduced the holistic management concept of the underground resources including underground space, groundwater, geomaterials and geothermal energy. In terms of its transportation environment, such as traffic congestion and public transportation services, the Seoul Metropolitan Area is very similar to that of Tokyo. Thus, the Korean Government is considering constructing a deep subterranean railway systems, which is to be twice as fast as the existing subway in the Seoul Metropolitan Area and is to be constructed in the space under 40 m from the ground level (Lee et al., 2010; Park et al., 2010). The status of this system is currently at the feasibility study. 2.2. Public acceptability Procedurally, public acceptability has to be studied prior to adapting a new policy or an innovative technology. In the literature in the transportation field, road pricing policies have frequently been found to be a new congestion relief tools (Pridmore and Miola, 2011). Jaensirisak et al. (2005) reviewed a large number of public acceptability studies of road pricing in the UK in view of two aspects: factors influencing acceptability of road pricing and predictive models of acceptability. In the study, they explained variations in public acceptability of road pricing between car users and non-car users based on a 2 Although underground structures perform well during seismic events due to the lower amplitudes of vibration experienced by buried facilities and the robustness of structure design and construction (Hashash et al., 2001), the public generally feel that they are unsafe during seismic activities. Thus, underground structures in the study are expressed as unsafe ones.
84
Y. Chung, H. Kim / Transportation Research Part A 77 (2015) 82–94
stated preference survey and a logit model. In addition, there is extensive literature arguing for the acceptability of road pricing. Recently, as pricing policies have been successfully implemented in Singapore, London, Stockholm, and several Norwegian cities, the direction of study has switched to the analysis of the role of public transport for feasibility and acceptability of pricing (Kottenhoff and Freij, 2009), the effect of road pricing on user’s tendency to adapt their current travel behavior (Cools et al., 2011), and the decisive factors to achieve acceptability given that the public is familiar with pricing (Eliasson and Jonsson, 2011). Such studies were based on surveys and multivariate statistical analyses. Moreover, a variety of innovative technologies have been envisioned for the transportation sector, which include alternative fuel technologies to vehicle-based transportation and intelligent transportation systems (ITS) technologies. Public acceptability concerning alternative fuel-related technologies has been studied for achievable technologies in the longer term such as hydrogen fuel cell and plug-in hybrids (O’Garra et al., 2005, 2007; Tarigan et al., 2012; Thesen and Langhelle, 2008; Yetano Roche et al., 2010). These studies were also based on surveys and in-depth analyses. In addition, a considerable number of studies have been conducted on public acceptability of ITS technologies. For example, these include acceptability of ITS technologies by older drivers (in-vehicle navigation, rear collision warning, mayday system, night vision enhancement, a device for assisting gap acceptance at junctions and a heads-up display) (Oxley, 1996), acceptability of seven in-vehicle ITS technologies (forward collision warning, intelligent speed adaptation (ISA), mayday system, electronic license, alcohol interlock, fatigue monitoring, and lane departure warning) (Regan et al., 2002), acceptability of ISA (Vlassenroot et al., 2010), and acceptability of a freeway booking systems (Chung et al., 2012). Since ITS technologies can be promptly introduced in the field, the result from the acceptability analyses can be reflected in the design of the product as well as its operational strategy in the near future. 2.3. Literature review summary The discussion on deep subterranean railway systems in urban areas so far has been concentrated on the design or planning level and technological or economic feasibility without significant and detailed analyses of the key factors regarding their acceptability. In technical innovation and policy implementation, though the public has often been slighted as a generalizable entity that tends to confirm to a new technological innovation, recent studies recognize it as a crucial component in successful implementation of a technology (Flynn, 2007; Ricci et al., 2007). When implementing a new transportation system, such as a deep subterranean railway system in urban areas, it is very plausible that the major barriers may lie in the field of public acceptability rather than that of the technical issues. As previous acceptability analyses for road pricing, alternative fuel-technologies, and information technologies indicate, introduction of a new transportation service and policy implementation also has to acknowledge and deal with complex social sentiments and public attitudes toward the likely consequences the new technology may bring to the quality of life, such as air quality, health risks, environmental comfort and safety. Therefore, it is important to estimate not only the current level of awareness of deep subterranean railway system in terms of technological features, depth, construction location, and performance, but also the public’s perception on the issues that are felt to be of immediate interest to them, such as convenience and safety concerns and environmental concerns. Once the technological issues are solved and public attitudes are identified, the challenge is then to persuade and moderate conflicting opinions from supporters and opponents. Although a deep subterranean railway system can provide high-speed rail transportation service in congested urban areas, users who feel the emotional stress from concerns of safety and security and the inconvenience in accessing and transferring to deep stations can oppose it. Therefore, the introduction of a deep subterranean railway system and policy direction should be based on the analysis of public acceptability. 3. Deep subterranean railway system As described above, there have been various restrictions on developing deep subterranean railway systems in urban areas. However, technological advancements and saturated development of shallow underground space led to the increasing need for deep subterranean railway systems in urban areas. As a result, these systems are under the planning and/or design level in Japan, China, Switzerland, France, and Korea. However, the definition of the term ‘deep’ varies among the countries. For example, the ‘‘Special Committee for the Utilization of Deep Underground Spaces,’’ which was formed within the Prime Minister’s Office of Japan in 1995, defined the scope of deep underground space as the space of a level of over 40 m below underground level (Takasaki et al., 2000). Based on the activities of this Committee, the Special Measures Act for Public Use of Deep Underground was enacted in 2000 (Chikahisa et al., 2004; Dobashi et al., 2008). A similar act for deep underground use with the same definition is under consideration in Korea. Additionally, the Korean Government has decided to construct the deep-underground Great Train eXpress (GTX) at a depth of 40 m below the urban ground level (Kim et al., 2011; Lee et al., 2010; Park et al., 2010, 2012). Fig. 1 shows a schematic layout of deep subterranean railway systems in urban areas like a GTX in Korea, which is based on the figure by Takasaki et al. (2000). As shown in Fig. 1, since current geotechnologies and related science and engineering fields make it possible to use deep underground space to support livable, resilient, and sustainable cities (NRC, 2013), the deep subterranean railway systems are expected to have a high degree of feasibility and realization in Korea as well as in other counties.
Y. Chung, H. Kim / Transportation Research Part A 77 (2015) 82–94
85
Fig. 1. Schematic layout of deep subterranean railway system in urban areas.
4. Acceptability analysis 4.1. Conceptual model and hypotheses Although the deep subterranean railway system may be feasible in perspective of engineering and economics, it can meet opponents due to the low level of awareness regarding the system, the emotional concerns and anxiety regarding the underground infrastructure security and safety, the inconvenience regarding the accessibility of deep stations, and environmental issues such as noise and vibration. In addition, acceptable consciousness of GTX can be considered with respect to public and private aspects: ‘‘public aspect’’ in that GTX would serve the public interest without infringing on private property, and ‘‘private aspect’’ in that it affects one’s economic and environmental profit and loss by having GTX under one’s neighboring or residential area. Based on the above hypothesized relationships, this study proposes the conceptual model as shown in Fig. 2, and the hypotheses are as follows: Hypothesis 1. Awareness of GTX is positively related to its acceptability. Awareness refers to the level of public knowledge of the basic information about the deep subterranean railway system. According to previous studies, awareness of new transportation policies or systems has been found to be positively related to their acceptability (Eriksson et al., 2006; Jaensirisak et al., 2005; O’Garra et al., 2005; Piriyawat et al., 2009). Hypothesis 2. Inconvenience and instability concerns regarding the GTX are negatively related to its acceptability. Inconvenience and instability concern is a measure of a comparison between peoples’ expectations for GTX and actual satisfaction of existing subway systems, in terms of accessibility, transfer, and safety. It is found that transit passengers’ satisfaction depends on accessibility to railway stations, travel comfort, and safety (Brons et al., 2009; Eboli and Mazzulla, 2007, 2012; Tyrinopoulos and Antoniou, 2013). Hypothesis 3. Environmental concern regarding noise and vibration generated by the GTX is negatively related to its acceptability. Since the GTX can be operated under the residential or business areas rather than under the existing roadways, the associative communities could feel that it could generate annoying noise and vibration. Therefore, this issue could have a negative impact on introducing the GTX.
86
Y. Chung, H. Kim / Transportation Research Part A 77 (2015) 82–94
Fig. 2. The conceptual model.
4.2. Survey design and data collection Based on the conceptual model and hypotheses described above, the questionnaire was composed of four parts: (1) the basic information about the deep subterranean railway system, (2) the perceived inconvenience and instability of the system, (3) environmental issues such as noise and vibration, and (4) public acceptability. Since the acceptability for a public policy or system can be significantly influenced by the psychological factor of fairness and infringement on freedom (Baron, 1995; Baron and Jurney, 1993; Fujii et al., 2004), the fourth part was divided into public and private aspects.3 Therefore, the factors and variables that influence the acceptability of the deep subterranean railway system are identified and grouped into four categories. They include awareness factors, inconvenience and instability factors, environmental factors, and acceptability factors. Data collection from the respondents was conducted through a telephone-based survey of residents in the vicinity of the planned GTX from September 7 to 30, 2009. Specifically, this study targeted the respondents who reside within 3 km of the planned GTX line, and are the potential GTX users. A total of 506 samples were collected, and their demographic information is shown in Table 1. From the survey, about 70% of the respondents answered that they take a neutral or opposing attitude to introducing the deep subterranean railway systems. Table 2 shows the contents of the questionnaire with respect to the factors. In addition, the results of factor analysis and Cronbach’s alpha values are presented in Table 2. Cronbach alpha values were calculated to assess the internal consistency in extracted factors. In general, the values of 0.6–0.7 can be considered as the lower limit of acceptability (Hair et al., 2006). However, as seen in Table 2, the Cronbach alpha value with respect to inconvenience and instability factor was just 0.501. Moreover, the factor loading value of the seismic risk related indicator was very low (0.18). Therefore, in spite of the constructed conceptual model and hypothesis, we modified the second hypothesis. That is, the instability concern has been separated from the inconvenience and instability factors. As a result, the Cronbach’s alpha value with respect to inconvenience factor was increased to 0.715. However, we applied other environment related variables for the acceptability analysis for the purpose of this study, which is to identify in advance the barrier factors of the deep subterranean railway systems, and to suggest public policy direction to mitigate public opposition. 4.3. Descriptive statistics 4.3.1. Awareness factor The results of the survey regarding the awareness level for GTX construction is presented in Fig. 3. The awareness of the planned GTX lines was 29.6% (26.3% + 3.3%), while the awareness of more detailed information such as speed and increase in the number of transfer was lower at 18.0% (14.2% + 3.8%), 11.5% (8.5% + 3.0%) respectively. Interestingly, the awareness level for its construction at a depth of 40 m below the urban ground level was low, at 23.1% (19.0% + 4.0%), whereas the awareness level for its construction possibly under the ground of the general buildings was much lower, at 18.0% (14.8% + 3.2%). 4.3.2. Inconvenience factor Fig. 4 represents the results of the survey regarding inconvenience and instability for using the GTX. Since the GTX is constructed at a depth of 40 m below the urban ground level, its use is assumed to cause great inconvenience for passengers 3 The private aspect implies the acceptability when GTX passes under the private real estate such as respondent’s land and buildings. On the other hand, the public aspect implies the acceptability when GTX passes under public facilities or non-residential commercial buildings such as shopping center and office buildings.
87
Y. Chung, H. Kim / Transportation Research Part A 77 (2015) 82–94 Table 1 Demographic information of respondents. Total
Samples
Percentage
506
100
Gender
Male Female
229 277
45 55
Age
20s 30s 40s 50s Over 60s
34 100 154 125 102
6.7 19.8 28.7 24.7 20.2
Occupation
Employee Private business Housewife Etc.
144 132 168 62
28.5 26.1 33.2 12.3
Residential area
Seoul Gyeonggi Incheon
327 88 91
64.6 17.4 18.0
Table 2 Contents of the questionnaire. Questions Awareness factors (scaled in 3 levels: unknown, heard, and well known) – There is planning for lines of GTX in Seoul Metropolitan Area – The average speed of GTX will be about 100 km/h – The number of transfer times could be increased – GTX will be constructed at a depth of 40 m below the urban ground level (GL) – GTX will be constructed at a depth of 40 m below the GL of the urban buildingsa Inconvenience and instability factor (scaled in 5 levels from very high to very low) – The accessibility of GTX could be inconvenient, compared to existing subways – The transfer of GTX could be inconvenient, compared to existing subways – GTX could be unsafe for various disasters such a seismic events Environmental factor (scaled in 5 levels from never to very high) – GTX could make more noise than existing subways – GTX could make more vibration than existing subways Acceptability (scaled in 5 levels from impossible to possible) – GTX is acceptable in public – GTX is acceptable in private
Mean
Standard deviation
Factor loading
1.33 1.22 1.14 1.27 1.21
0.024 0.022 0.019 0.023 0.021
0.94 0.96 0.92 0.98 0.97
3.12 3.18 3.56
0.075 0.068 0.073
0.83 0.83 0.18
3.14 3.31
0.074 0.059
0.66 0.86
2.76 2.42
0.046 0.118
0.90 0.89
Cronbach’s alpha 0.935
0.501
0.542
0.832
a Although this question seems to be similar to the fourth question of awareness factors, this question is notionally different in that some people may know GTX will be constructed at a depth of 40 m below the urban ground level, but not below urban buildings.
Fig. 3. Result on awareness level of GTX.
making transfers. The results of the survey are considerably consistent with the researchers’ intuitive assumption: inconvenience factors for accessibility and transferring are measured to be, respectively, 66.8% and 71%, with transferring being higher than accessibility. In case of the awareness of the instability factor, 50.7% of the respondents believe that the GTX is unsafe—reflecting common folk misconception contrary to the technological research that finds that underground systems are in fact safer than surface systems in a seismic event.
88
Y. Chung, H. Kim / Transportation Research Part A 77 (2015) 82–94
Fig. 4. Result on inconvenience and instability level of GTX.
Fig. 5. Result on environmental concern level of GTX.
4.3.3. Environmental factor The result of the survey regarding noise and vibration caused by the GTX is presented in Fig. 5. As there is a folk misconception of instability in the occurrence of a seismic event, 53.3% of the respondents expressed worries about vibration and 36.8% about noise, although the noise and vibration caused by the GTX do not reach the surface. 4.3.4. Acceptability factor Lastly, as the results of the survey regarding acceptability presented in Fig. 6 show, 45.7% of the respondents opposed the GTX when the location for its construction is not under or around the respondent’s residence (i.e., public acceptability), whereas the opposition rose to 63.0% when the GTX goes directly through underground the respondent’s residence (private acceptability). The results come from the respondents’ anticipation of the increase in land value in the vicinity of the GTX line because a new transit line generally leads to the increase in land value (e.g., Cervero and Kang, 2011; Golias, 2002; McDonald and Osuji, 1995; Pagliara and Papa, 2011). Therefore, there is a conflict between interest in increasing land value and worries about noise and vibration for the residents who live in the vicinity of the planned GTX line. If the line passes under private property, they are more opposed to the GTX. As individual’s attitude toward a policy involves an inner conflict or negotiation between maximizing individual gain and pursuing public interest (e.g., Dawes, 1980; Kollock, 1998; Lichbach, 1996; Poteete et al., 2010; Vatn, 2005), this aspect needs to be reflected in the policy-making in the way they do not perceive themselves as losing on the issue and the construction of GTS as undesired personal loss.
Fig. 6. Result on acceptability level of GTX.
Y. Chung, H. Kim / Transportation Research Part A 77 (2015) 82–94
89
5. Multivariate analysis for public acceptability 5.1. Structural equation modeling This study used structural equation modeling (SEM) to identify the relationship between acceptability and its causal factors. SEM is a statistical method for testing and estimated causal relations using combination of statistical data and qualitative causal assumptions, and it is widely used in psychology, sociology, the biological sciences, educational research, political science, market research, and travel behavior research (Golob, 2003). SEM may be used as a more powerful alternative to multiple regression, path analysis, factor analysis, time series analysis, and analysis of covariance, indicating that these methods may be viewed as special cases of SEM. Generally, advantages of SEM compared to multivariate statistical methods include more flexible assumptions-particularly allowing interpretation even in the face of multicollinearity, the use of confirmatory factor analysis to reduce measurement error by having multiple indicators per latent variable, the attractiveness of SEM’s graphical modeling interface, the desirability of testing models overall rather than coefficients individually, the ability to test models with multiple dependents, the ability to test coefficients across multiple between-subjects groups, and the ability to handle difficult data such as time series with autocorrelated error, non-normal data, and incomplete data. An SEM is composed of two main components as shown in Fig. 7: (1) a measurement model, and (2) a structural model. The measurement model describes the relationships between observed variables and the constructs these variables are hypothesized to measure. Therefore, the measurement model of SEM evaluates how well the observed variables combine to identify underlying hypothesized constructs (Weston and Gore, 2006). On the other hand, the structural model describes interrelationships among constructs. Thus, equations in the structural portion of the model specify the hypothesized relationships among latent variables. The explanation of each element in the figure is presented in Table 3. More detailed presentations of SEM and its estimation procedures are discussed in many SEM texts such as Mueller (1996), Kaplan (2000), and Byrne (2001). 5.2. Assessment of an SEM for the acceptability Since an SEM represents a series of hypotheses about how the variables in an analysis are generated and related, the application of the SEM technique starts with the specification of a model to be estimated. Thus, the assessment of Measurement Model
ζ1 δ1
x1
δ2
x2
δ3
x3
λy11
λ x11 λ x12
ξ
γ 11
η
1
1
λy13
βm
λ x13
ξm
λy12
ηm
y1
ε1
y2
ε2
y3
ε3
Structural Model Fig. 7. An SEM structure.
Table 3 Elements of structural equation model. Measurement model
x q 1 column vector of observed exogenous variables y p 1 column vector of observed endogenous variables n n 1 column vector of latent exogenous variables g m 1 column vector of latent endogenous variables d q 1 column vector of measurement error terms for observed variables x e p 1 column vector of measurement error terms for observed variables y KX the matrix (q n) of structural coefficients for latent exogenous variables to their observed indicator variables KY the matrix (p m) of structural coefficients for latent endogenous variables to their observed indicator variables
Structural model
C the matrix (m n) of regression effects for exogenous latent variables to endogenous latent variables B the coefficient matrix (m n) of direct effects between endogenous latent variables n m 1 column vector of the error terms
Covariance matrix
He the covariance matrix (p p) of e Hd the covariance matrix (q q) of d U the covariance matrix (n n) of n W the covariance matrix (m m) of f
90
Y. Chung, H. Kim / Transportation Research Part A 77 (2015) 82–94 Table 4 Statistics for model assessment. Fit index
Fit index
v2
166.9 (p-value = 0.000)
CFI
0.95
Degrees of freedom RMSEA
32 0.08
GFI AGFI
0.97 0.92
goodness-of-fit and the estimation of parameters of the hypothesized model(s) are critical. There are two popular methods to evaluate model fit: (1) the v2 goodness-of-fit statistic assessing the magnitude of discrepancy between the sample and fitted covariance matrices, and (2) fit indices quantifying the degree of fit along a continuum. Generally, the fit criteria of a SEM indicate to what extent the specified model fits the empirical data. Only the v2 goodness-of-fit statistic is available for inferential statistical evaluation of a SEM, while other measures are descriptive. When performing the v2 goodness-of-fit tests, care must be taken in the sample size. That is, the v2 statistic is increasing along with increasing sample size (more than 200). Since the sample size in this study is 506, the v2 statistic could be high. Due to such a possible drawback of the v2 goodness-of-fit test, the descriptive goodness-of-fit measures are supplemented. As for the descriptive goodness-of-fit measures, there have been various studies performed to suggest the conventional cutoff criteria for various fit indices including comparative fit index (CFI), goodness-of-fit index (GFI) and adjusted goodness-of-fit index (AGFI), and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA). Recently, Schermelleh-Engel et al. (2003) recommended some rules of thumb criteria for goodness-of-fit indices. Table 4 shows the statistics for goodness-of-fit tests of the estimated SEM model for the acceptability of the deep subterranean railway system. The degrees of freedom of the model is 32, with a v2 statistic of 166.9 (p-value = 0.000). However, the sample size in this study is comparatively large (506) (i.e., the v2 statistic is high). Thus, the descriptive goodness-of-fit measures are applied as alternatives, and they include CFI, GFI, AGFI, and RMSEA. The cutoff criteria are based on the suggestion by Schermelleh-Engel et al. (2003)-a model with CFI of above 0.95, GFI of above 0.90, AGFI of above 0.85, and RMSEA of less than 0.08 as acceptable. As a result, the goodness-of-fit indices suggest the model fit acceptably (CFI = 0.95; GFI = 0.97; AGFI = 0.92; RMSEA = 0.08). 5.3. An SEM for the acceptability Fig. 8 presents the estimated SEM for the acceptability of the deep subterranean railway systems in urban areas. In the figure, the numbers in the arrows are parameters estimated at the 95% significant level and the numbers in parentheses indicate t-value. Additionally, the asterisk in parentheses indicates fixed parameter to identify the scale of error term. First of all, the awareness of the deep subterranean railway systems has a positive relationship with its acceptability; the coefficient of awareness factors was 0.20. Therefore, it is expected that a publicity campaign for the deep subterranean railway systems could be a critical factor in its successful operation in the future. However, as expected, the acceptability is found to show a negative relationship with environmental factors and inconvenience factors; the coefficient of environmental factors was the same as one of inconvenience factors with 0.32. In addition, the inconvenience and awareness of the deep subterranean railway systems are found to be positive and negative correlation with the environmental factors, respectively. Thus, the environmentally negative effect was found to be higher with the increase in the inconvenience, and it led to reducing the systems’ acceptability. On the other hand, the environmentally negative factors were found to be less with the increase in the level of the awareness. Lastly, as expected, the risk perception of the deep subterranean railway systems’ instability has a negative impact on its awareness as well as its acceptability. Moreover, although the relationship between the instability and the inconvenience factor is positive, the instability consequently has a negative relationship with the systems’ acceptability because the systems’ acceptability is negatively affected by the inconvenience factors. 6. Policy suggestions As the results of the survey indicate, there exists a positive relationship between the public acceptability and the public awareness of the GTX in terms of the subway lines, structures, speed, and transfer, whereas the factors of environment, inconvenience, and instability have a negative impact on its acceptability. While deep subterranean railway systems are technologically feasible and even desirable in terms of land use, the level of the public awareness and attitudes is also critical for the successful introduction of this new transportation service. The public in the contemporary society is ever more sensitive to personal health, technological risk and environmental safety, and this risk perceptions can be greatly influenced by an affective approach that puts special emphasis on the emotional side of the public in making decisions (Flynn, 2007; Slovic, 2000). From this perspective, soft measures such as campaigns and advertisements to enhance public awareness are needed to help the public easily recognize and understand the issues regarding the GTX. Affective awareness campaigns and advertisements are particularly effective, first, to deliver needed and persuasive information from the perspective of public
Y. Chung, H. Kim / Transportation Research Part A 77 (2015) 82–94
91
Fig. 8. Final SEM for the acceptability of the deep subterranean railway systems.
perception (Weiss and Tschirhart, 1994); secondly, to appeal to the public with the issues they react to most emotionally such as safety and environment (Gobe, 2010); and thirdly, to engage with the public in social conversation and have communal dialogue with groups with different opinions (Chung et al., 2012). First, the delivery of accurate information about the deep subterranean railway system is needed to enhance public acceptability. Whereas about 70% of the respondents answered that they would take an opposing or neutral attitude toward the introduction of the deep subterranean railway system, the acceptability was found to be higher with the increase in the awareness level of the system. For one instance, as indicated in the survey results and the SEM results, although the public belief that the GTX could be unsafe during seismic events has highest influence on the survey result (3.56), in fact it has been proven empirically that deeper areas are safer than areas near the surface due to the violent movements at the surface and the attenuation of the seismic waves at the deeper areas (Balaker et al., 2006). Another misconception is found in their assumption that the noise (3.14) and vibration (3.31) caused by the GTX would reach the surface. Therefore, for the success of the new railway system, it is important to respond to and reshape the public mindset through soft measures to inform and educate the public related to the GTX and even to correct their common sense and stereotypical assumptions. Secondly, awareness campaigns and media advertising tend to soften the minds of the general public through emotional factors such as health, protection, safety, and guilt, which are expected to have a pivotal influence on the judgment of the potential users of a service (Goleman, 2000). In modern society, the public considers and decides their preference based on personal concerns and emotional factors; they act not only through rational judgments based on utility and cost, but also through emotional judgments (Gobe, 2010; Maddock and Fulton, 1996). In the short-term, soft measures raise the awareness level of the service and affect the general discourse of the public, and in the long-term, by increasing the value of the service in terms of environment and safety, they sustain the customers’ loyalty and confidence in the service. Therefore, awareness campaigns need to relate the usefulness of the new transportation system regarding its safety and social goals, and give social meaning and significance to the public’s personal decision. In addition, an extensive publicity campaign can help opponents of the GTX understand the social benefits of the deep subterranean railway systems, such as the reduction of road traffic congestion. For the success of the new policy, the public has to participate voluntarily in using the new transportation system. For this, it is important to offer the venue where they can interact and share their opinions and concerns. The provision of sufficient information, the promotion of sense of security and safety, and the interactive dialogue among the supporters, the opponents, and neutral groups can provide a shared context through which they can engage themselves in social goals and the public common (Chung et al., 2012; Roe, 1994). The exposure to information about positive and negative factors related to environmental and safety issues is expected to
92
Y. Chung, H. Kim / Transportation Research Part A 77 (2015) 82–94
build an overall perspective and help understand the groups with different opinions. Through this process, the government must play a leading role in developing active communication by using professional consultants and offering various community workshops and hearings in order to involve those in favor and those against the new policy. More importantly, to enhance policy literacy among the public, the campaign needs to include the full range of individual and social benefits and burdens, including other social and economic factors such as the reduction of traffic congestion, the expected ratio of the usage of the public transportation compared to private vehicles, the land use of neighboring areas, real estate pricing, and regional economy vitalization. Finally, there is an important finding from the SEM results: the inconvenience factors have a positive impact on the environment factors. This result implies the public sensitive to the systems’ inconvenience are also sensitive to the environment issues. Part of this correlation might also be explained by the fact that people that are sensitive to one environmental problem might also be sensitive to other environmental problems (Klæboe et al., 2000). In fact, the inconvenience factors are related to the systems’ technological and operational issues such as station design, platform connections, and train operation technologies. Therefore, increasing the public acceptability of the GTX not only requires soft measures such as awareness campaigns and advertisements, but also technological approaches. For example, an introducing rail operation and networking technology such as mutual direct operations and line switches can reduce the inconvenience of passengers’ transfer and accessibility (Harada et al., 2012; Iwakura et al., 2013). Then, it will also lead to reducing the perception of the environmentally negative factors. 7. Conclusions This study analyzed the public acceptability of a deep subterranean railway system, which will be constructed in the space 40 m below ground level and operated at twice the speed of the existing subway system. Since the success of such a new system depends on the acceptability of the public, a telephone-based survey was conducted for residents in the vicinity of the planned GTX stations or line in the Seoul metropolitan area to examine the key factors that influence the acceptability. The results were all consistent with intuitive expectations. Firstly, the awareness of the deep subterranean railway systems has a positive impact on its acceptability. In addition, the acceptability is found to show a negative relationship with environmental, inconvenient, and unstable factors. Based on public acceptability, soft measures such as awareness campaigns and advertisements are recommended to effectively address and mitigate the concerns and issues raised by the public. Therefore, the advertising campaign for the public needs to be oriented toward reinforcing personal and communal beliefs regarding security and health sine the major opposition comes from worries and assumptions about safety, rather than facts about technology and service. Soft measures are expected to engage the public and identify effective means to inform and educate as well as relieve concerns and uneasiness. The public understanding and participation are as crucial as this new technology can provide solutions to traffic congestion and improving mobility. Additionally, there is an important finding: the inconvenience factors have a positive impact on the environment factors. Thus, the technological improvement to reduce inconvenience factors of the GTX use will lead to reducing its environmentally negative perception as well as to increasing its public acceptability. Since this study was only focused on users, further research is needed to compare its economic efficiency with the construction of other alternative transportation systems such as roadways, surface railways, and similar subway systems. Acknowledgment This work was supported by the Korea Transport Institute Research Grant in 2009. References Balaker, T., Moore, A.T., Passantino, G., Poole, R.W., Summers, A., Wang, L., 2006. Addressing California’s Transportation Needs: Problems with Proposition 1B and Alternative Approaches. Reason Foundation, Los Angeles, CA. Baron, J., 1995. Blind justice: fairness to groups and the do-no-harm principle. J. Behav. Decis. Making 8, 71–83. Baron, J., Jurney, J., 1993. Norms against voting for coerced reform. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 64, 347. Bobylev, N., 2008. Urbanization and environmental security. In: Liotta, P.H., Mouat, D., Kepner, W., Lancaster, J. (Eds.), Environmental Change and Human Security: Recognizing and Acting on Hazard Impacts. Springer, Netherlands, pp. 203–216. Bobylev, N., 2009. Mainstreaming sustainable development into a city’s Master plan: a case of urban underground space use. Land Use Policy 26, 1128– 1137. Brons, M., Givoni, M., Rietveld, P., 2009. Access to railway stations and its potential in increasing rail use. Transport. Res. Part A: Policy Pract. 43, 136–149. Byrne, B.M., 2001. Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ. Cervero, R., Kang, C.D., 2011. Bus rapid transit impacts on land uses and land values in Seoul, Korea. Transp. Policy 18, 102–116. Chikahisa, H., Chida, S., Tamura, H., 2004. Applications and Problems of the Underground Space Use in Japan Tunnel Association. Singapore. Chow, F., Kjekstad, O., Paul, T., 2002. Hidden Aspects of Urban Planning: Surface and Underground Development. Thomas Telford. Chung, Y., Song, T., Park, J., 2012. Freeway booking policy: public discourse and acceptability analysis. Transp. Policy 24, 223–231. Cools, M., Brijs, K., Tormans, H., Moons, E., Janssens, D., Wets, G., 2011. The socio-cognitive links between road pricing acceptability and changes in travelbehavior. Transport. Res. Part A: Policy Pract. 45, 779–788. Dawes, R.M., 1980. Social dilemmas. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 31, 169–193. Derrible, S., Kennedy, C., 2009. Network analysis of world subway systems using updated graph theory. Transport. Res. Rec.: J. Transport. Res. Board 2112, 17–25.
Y. Chung, H. Kim / Transportation Research Part A 77 (2015) 82–94
93
Dobashi, H., Hatsuku, T., Ichimura, T., Hori, M., Yamada, T., Ohbo, N., Moriguchi, M., Itami, H., 2008. Full 3D Seismic Response Analysis of Underground Ramp Tunnel Structure Using Large-Scale Numerical Computation. In: Proceedings of The 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Eboli, L., Mazzulla, G., 2007. Service quality attributes affecting customer satisfaction for bus transit. J. Public Transport. 10, 21–34. Eboli, L., Mazzulla, G., 2012. Structural equation modelling for analysing passengers’ perceptions about railway services. Proc. – Soc. Behav. Sci. 54, 96–106. Eliasson, J., Jonsson, L., 2011. The unexpected ‘‘yes’’: explanatory factors behind the positive attitudes to congestion charges in Stockholm. Transp. Policy 18, 636–647. Eriksson, L., Garvill, J., Nordlund, A.M., 2006. Acceptability of travel demand management measures: the importance of problem awareness, personal norm, freedom, and fairness. J. Environ. Psychol. 26, 15–26. Flynn, R., 2007. Risk and the public acceptance of new technologies. In: Flynn, R., Bellaby, P. (Eds.), Risk and the Public Acceptance of New Technologies. Palgrave MacMillan, Basingstoke, Hampshire and New York, pp. 1–23. Fujii, S., Gärling, T., Jakobsson, C., Jou, R.-C., 2004. A cross-country study of fairness and infringement on freedom as determinants of car owners’ acceptance of road pricing. Transportation 31, 285–295. Gobe, M., 2010. Emotional Branding: The New Paradigm for Connecting Brands to People, Updated and Revised ed. Allworth Press, New York, NY. Goleman, D., 2000. Working with Emotional Intelligence, Reprinted ed. Bantam, New York, New York. Golias, J.C., 2002. Analysis of traffic corridor impacts from the introduction of the new Athens Metro system. J. Transp. Geogr. 10, 91–97. Golob, T.F., 2003. Structural equation modeling for travel behavior research. Transport. Res. Part B: Methodol. 37, 1–25. Goto, T., 2001. New stations based on philosophical reunion of diversed technologies. Jpn. Railway Transp. Rev. 28, 32–41. Hair, J.F., Tatham, R.L., Anderson, R.E., Black, W., 2006. Multivariate Data Analysis. Pearson Prentice Hall Upper Saddle River, NJ. Harada, M., Mori, H., Osonoi, H., Ohira, T., Koike, T., Iwama, N., 2012. Shinkansen Traffic Management System for Mutual Direct Operation of Sanyo Shinkansen and Kyushu Shinkansen. Hitachi Review. Hitachi Ltd, Tokyo, Japan, pp. 331–335. Hashash, Y.M.A., Hook, J.J., Schmidt, B., I-Chiang Yao, J., 2001. Seismic design and analysis of underground structures. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 16, 247– 293. Iwakura, S., Kawamura, K., Tsunoda, R., Takahashi, I., 2013. A Multi Agent Simulation Model for Estimating Knock-on Train Delays under High-Frequency Urban Rail Operation. In: Proceedings of Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies. Jaensirisak, S., Wardman, M., May, A.D., 2005. Explaining variations in public acceptability of road pricing schemes. J. Transp. Econ. Policy 39, 127–153. Kaplan, D., 2000. Structural Equation Modeling: Foundations and Extensions. Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA. Kim, C.Y., Yim, S.B., Jang, S.H., Lee, S.W., Kim, K.Y., Park, K.H., 2011. Urban deep road tunnel construction project in Korea and technical requirements. Proc. Eng. 14, 3151–3154. Klæboe, R., Kolbenstvedt, M., Clench-Aas, J., Bartonova, A., 2000. Oslo traffic study – part 1: an integrated approach to assess the combined effects of noise and air pollution on annoyance. Atmos. Environ. 34, 4727–4736. Kollock, P., 1998. Social dilemmas: the anatomy of cooperation. Ann. Rev. Sociol., 183–214 Kottenhoff, K., Freij, K.B., 2009. The role of public transport for feasibility and acceptability of congestion charging – the case of Stockholm. Transport. Res. Part A: Policy Pract. 43, 297–305. Koyama, Y., 1997. Railway construction in Japan. Jpn. Railway Transp. Rev. 32, 36–41. Lee, H.W., Park, C.B., Lee, B.S., Park, H.J., 2010. Exit end Effect Reduction of a Linear Induction Motor for the Deep-Underground GTX. In: Proceedings of Electrical Machines (ICEM), 2010 XIX International Conference on, pp. 1–4. Li, H.-Q., Parriaux, A., Thalmann, P., Li, X.-Z., 2013a. An integrated planning concept for the emerging underground urbanism: Deep City Method Part 1 concept, process and application. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 38, 559–568. Li, H., Li, X., Parriaux, A., Thalmann, P., 2013b. An integrated planning concept for the emerging underground urbanism: Deep City Method Part 2 case study for resource supply and project valuation. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 38, 569–580. Lichbach, M.I., 1996. The Cooperator’s Dilemma. University of Michigan Press. Maddock, R.C., Fulton, R.L., 1996. Marketing to the Mind. Right Brain Strategies for Advertising and Marketing Greenwood Publishing Group, Westport, CT. McDonald, J.F., Osuji, C.I., 1995. The effect of anticipated transportation improvement on residential land values. Reg. Sci. Urban Econ. 25, 261–278. Mueller, R., 1996. Basic Principles of Structural Equation Modeling: An Introduction to LISREL and EQS. Springer, New York. NRC, 2013. Underground Engineering for Sustainable Urban Development. The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C. O’Garra, T., Mourato, S., Pearson, P., 2005. Analysing awareness and acceptability of hydrogen vehicles: a London case study. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 30, 649– 659. O’Garra, T., Mourato, S., Garrity, L., Schmidt, P., Beerenwinkel, A., Altmann, M., Hart, D., Graesel, C., Whitehouse, S., 2007. Is the public willing to pay for hydrogen buses? A comparative study of preferences in four cities. Energy Policy 35, 3630–3642. Oxley, P.R., 1996. Elderly drivers and safety when using IT systems. IATSS Res. 20, 102–110. Pagliara, F., Papa, E., 2011. Urban rail systems investments: an analysis of the impacts on property values and residents’ location. J. Transp. Geogr. 19, 200– 211. Park, C.-B., Lee, B.-S., Lee, J., 2010. A study on the applicability of the conventional TTX propulsion system on the high-speed propulsion system for a deepunderground GTX. Int. J. Railway 3, 54–59. Park, C.-B., Lee, H.-W., Lee, J., 2012. Performance analysis of the linear induction motor for the deep-underground high-speed GTX. J. Electr. Eng. Technol. 7, 200–206. Piriyawat, S., Van, H.T., Fujii, S., 2009. The roles of perceived effectiveness and problem awareness in the acceptability of road pricing in Bangkok. Sonklanakarin J. Sci. Technol. 31, 181. Poteete, A.R., Janssen, M.A., Ostrom, E., 2010. Working Together: Collective Action, the Commons, and Multiple Methods in Practice. Princeton University Press. Pridmore, A., Miola, A., 2011. Public Acceptability of Sustainable Transport Measures: A Review of the Literature. 2011 International Transport Forum. OECD, Leipzig, Germany, p. 24. Regan, M.A., Mitsopoulos, E., Haworth, N., Young, K., 2002. Acceptability of In-Vehicle Intelligent Transport Systems to Victorian Car Drivers. Monash University Accident Research Centre, Clayton, Victoria. Ricci, M., Bellaby, P., Flynn, R., 2007. Stakeholders’ and publics’ perceptions of hydrogen energy technologies. In: Flynn, R., Bellaby, P. (Eds.), Risk and the Public Acceptance of New Technologies. Palgrave MacMillan, Basingstoke, Hampshire and New York, NY, pp. 175–197. Roe, E., 1994. Narrative Policy Analysis: Theory and Practice. Duke University Press, Durham, NC. Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., Müller, H., 2003. Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: tests of significance and descriptive goodness-offit measures. Methods Psychol. Res. Online 8, 23–74. Slovic, P.E., 2000. The Perception of Risk. Earthscan Publications. Takasaki, H., Chikahisa, H., Yuasa, Y., 2000. Planning and mapping of subsurface space in Japan. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 15, 287–301. Tarigan, A.K.M., Bayer, S.B., Langhelle, O., Thesen, G., 2012. Estimating determinants of public acceptance of hydrogen vehicles and refuelling stations in greater Stavanger. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 37, 6063–6073. Thesen, G., Langhelle, O., 2008. Awareness, acceptability and attitudes towards hydrogen vehicles and filling stations: a Greater Stavanger case study and comparisons with London. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 33, 5859–5867. Tyrinopoulos, Y., Antoniou, C., 2013. Factors affecting modal choice in urban mobility. Eur. Transp. Res. Rev. 5, 27–39. Vatn, A., 2005. Rationality, institutions and environmental policy. Ecol. Econ. 55, 203–217.
94
Y. Chung, H. Kim / Transportation Research Part A 77 (2015) 82–94
Vlassenroot, S., Brookhuis, K., Marchau, V., Witlox, F., 2010. Towards defining a unified concept for the acceptability of Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS): a conceptual analysis based on the case of Intelligent Speed Adaptation (ISA). Transport. Res. Part F: Traffic Psychol. Behav. 13, 164–178. Webster, G.S., 1914. Subterranean street planning. Ann. Am. Acad. Polit. Soc. Sci. 51, 200–207. Weiss, J.A., Tschirhart, M., 1994. Public information campaigns as policy instruments. J. Policy Anal. Manage. 13, 82–119. Weston, R., Gore, P.A., 2006. A brief guide to structural equation modeling. Counsel. Psychol. 34, 719–751. Yetano Roche, M., Mourato, S., Fischedick, M., Pietzner, K., Viebahn, P., 2010. Public attitudes towards and demand for hydrogen and fuel cell vehicles: a review of the evidence and methodological implications. Energy Policy 38, 5301–5310.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Transportation Research Part A journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tra
Deep subterranean railway system: Acceptability assessment of the public discourse in the Seoul Metropolitan Area of South Korea Younshik Chung 1, Hyun Kim ⇑ Korea Transport Institute, Sejong 339-007, Republic of Korea
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 7 February 2014 Received in revised form 30 March 2015 Accepted 14 April 2015 Available online 16 May 2015 Keywords: Subway system Deep subterranean railway system Acceptability analysis Public discourse Affective approach Structural equation modeling
a b s t r a c t The objective of this study is to analyze the public acceptability of deep subterranean railway systems, which will be constructed in the space 40 m below ground level and will be operated at twice the speed of the existing subway system. Although such railway systems have been feasible in terms of construction technologies and economics, public acceptability must be considered for the successful introduction of such a new public infrastructure. Therefore, to perform the analysis of public acceptability, a telephone-based survey was conducted for residents in the vicinity of the planned the deep subterranean railway systems. As a result, about 70% of the respondents answered that they took a neutral or opposing attitude to introducing the deep subterranean railway systems. Awareness of the deep subterranean railway systems has a positive impact on its acceptability. In addition, the acceptability is found to show a negative relationship with environment and inconvenience factors. Based on the analysis results, an affective approach through soft measures such as awareness campaigns and advertisements is recommended to effectively address and mitigate the concerns and issues raised by the public. Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction The construction of a new rail transportation system in an existing metropolitan area has to overcome various restrictions, which include land compensation issues, urban landscape issues, environmental issues such as noise and vibration, and conflict with road transportation systems. The subsurface use of public land such as urban roadways has been partly satisfied with such limitations. Based on this background, the Seoul Metropolitan Government has also constructed a subway transportation network along with the urban roadway network, and its length amounts to about 500 km. In addition, the daily and annual ridership of the subway transportation system in the Seoul Metropolitan Area is the third highest in the world, after that in the Tokyo Metropolitan Area, Japan and the Moscow Metropolitan area, Russia (Derrible and Kennedy, 2009). Despite the high ridership of the subway transportation system in the Seoul Metropolitan Area, the Korean Government is planning to extend the subway transportation systems to mitigate road traffic congestion as well as to cope with the global warming issue. That is, the current policy priority for the high and increasing ridership lies in constructing a high-speed
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +82 (44) 211 3135; fax: +82 (44) 211 3285. 1
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (Y. Chung), [email protected] (H. Kim). Tel.: +82 (44) 211 3243; fax: +82 (44) 211 3285.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2015.04.008 0965-8564/Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Y. Chung, H. Kim / Transportation Research Part A 77 (2015) 82–94
83
railway system to complement the service of the existing urban subway systems. However, underground space in the Seoul Metropolitan Area is already crowded with various types of facilities such as electricity cables and ducts, sewerage and water supplies, gas pipes, underground parking lots, and subways. Additionally, since a specific level of horizontal curve is required for the operation of the high-speed railway, the subway system construction along with the urban roadway network can restricts the speed of high-speed subway train. As a result, the Korean Government has been increasingly interested in the utilization of other spaces other than the subsurface of the urban roadways. One such space is ‘deep subterranean space’ defined as that space under 40 m of depth in which there is no need to compensate landowners of the surface space for the use of the underground space. However, the use of deep subterranean space could lead to the emotional uneasiness of system users due to safety and security worries, such as seismic activity,2 the fear of deep subterranean, and other disasters. In addition, it may be perceived as inconvenient to access and transfer to deep stations, and as environmentally annoying in terms of noise and vibration. The purpose of this study is therefore to analyze the public acceptability of the deep subterranean railway systems, prior to the planning project of its construction. 2. Literature review 2.1. Deep subterranean railway systems in urban areas After the introduction of the concept of the subterranean street by Webster (1914), significant advancements in construction technologies during the 20th century resulted in a boom in underground space development. These technologies include reinforced concrete, tunneling in soft ground and the creation of open underground excavations with minimum subsidence of adjacent ground (facilitated by sheet piling, bored piles, and diaphragm walls). The late 20th century especially benefitted from advancements in underground construction and geotechnical soil improvement technologies. These technological advancements not only led to the operation of deep subterranean railway systems to connect locations via underwater tunnels such as Seikan Tunnel in Japan in 1988 and Channel Tunnel between the United Kingdom and France in 1994 (Chow et al., 2002; Koyama, 1997), but also enabled progressive urban underground space development in densely populated city areas, including excavation of large caverns in the shallow subsurface. As a result, the use of urban underground space has been more intensive with such technological advancements as well as with increasing urban underground space congestion and land prices and other environmental issues. Urban underground space is functionally used for utilities and communications (e.g., water, sewerage, gas, electric cables), transportation (e.g., railways, roadways, pedestrian tunnels), storage (e.g., food, water, hazardous goods), industry (e.g., power plants), public use (e.g., shopping centers, hospitals, civil defense structures), and private and personal use (e.g., parking lots). According to research by Bobylev (2008), utilities and transportation are the most common functions of urban underground space. This study was based on three cities, Paris, Tokyo, and Stockholm, and the result showed that the cities used more than 32% of urban underground space for transportation. Specifically, the city of Tokyo showed 55% of underground space being for rail transportation at 43%. Thus, the depth in Tokyo metro lines has progressed from shallow ground layers to deeper layers, and recently, it has reached 50 m in depth (Bobylev, 2009; Goto, 2001; Takasaki et al., 2000). Recently, Li et al. (2013a) proposed a new paradigm of economic development: underground urbanism defined as an innovative concept for urban restructuring and a transformational construction practice. In this study, they introduced its concept, process, and application in the city of Geneva, Switzerland. Also, to formulate 3D zoning, they demonstrated a comprehensive evaluation methodology for underground resources beneath the municipality of Suzhou in China (Li et al., 2013b). In these two studies, they introduced the holistic management concept of the underground resources including underground space, groundwater, geomaterials and geothermal energy. In terms of its transportation environment, such as traffic congestion and public transportation services, the Seoul Metropolitan Area is very similar to that of Tokyo. Thus, the Korean Government is considering constructing a deep subterranean railway systems, which is to be twice as fast as the existing subway in the Seoul Metropolitan Area and is to be constructed in the space under 40 m from the ground level (Lee et al., 2010; Park et al., 2010). The status of this system is currently at the feasibility study. 2.2. Public acceptability Procedurally, public acceptability has to be studied prior to adapting a new policy or an innovative technology. In the literature in the transportation field, road pricing policies have frequently been found to be a new congestion relief tools (Pridmore and Miola, 2011). Jaensirisak et al. (2005) reviewed a large number of public acceptability studies of road pricing in the UK in view of two aspects: factors influencing acceptability of road pricing and predictive models of acceptability. In the study, they explained variations in public acceptability of road pricing between car users and non-car users based on a 2 Although underground structures perform well during seismic events due to the lower amplitudes of vibration experienced by buried facilities and the robustness of structure design and construction (Hashash et al., 2001), the public generally feel that they are unsafe during seismic activities. Thus, underground structures in the study are expressed as unsafe ones.
84
Y. Chung, H. Kim / Transportation Research Part A 77 (2015) 82–94
stated preference survey and a logit model. In addition, there is extensive literature arguing for the acceptability of road pricing. Recently, as pricing policies have been successfully implemented in Singapore, London, Stockholm, and several Norwegian cities, the direction of study has switched to the analysis of the role of public transport for feasibility and acceptability of pricing (Kottenhoff and Freij, 2009), the effect of road pricing on user’s tendency to adapt their current travel behavior (Cools et al., 2011), and the decisive factors to achieve acceptability given that the public is familiar with pricing (Eliasson and Jonsson, 2011). Such studies were based on surveys and multivariate statistical analyses. Moreover, a variety of innovative technologies have been envisioned for the transportation sector, which include alternative fuel technologies to vehicle-based transportation and intelligent transportation systems (ITS) technologies. Public acceptability concerning alternative fuel-related technologies has been studied for achievable technologies in the longer term such as hydrogen fuel cell and plug-in hybrids (O’Garra et al., 2005, 2007; Tarigan et al., 2012; Thesen and Langhelle, 2008; Yetano Roche et al., 2010). These studies were also based on surveys and in-depth analyses. In addition, a considerable number of studies have been conducted on public acceptability of ITS technologies. For example, these include acceptability of ITS technologies by older drivers (in-vehicle navigation, rear collision warning, mayday system, night vision enhancement, a device for assisting gap acceptance at junctions and a heads-up display) (Oxley, 1996), acceptability of seven in-vehicle ITS technologies (forward collision warning, intelligent speed adaptation (ISA), mayday system, electronic license, alcohol interlock, fatigue monitoring, and lane departure warning) (Regan et al., 2002), acceptability of ISA (Vlassenroot et al., 2010), and acceptability of a freeway booking systems (Chung et al., 2012). Since ITS technologies can be promptly introduced in the field, the result from the acceptability analyses can be reflected in the design of the product as well as its operational strategy in the near future. 2.3. Literature review summary The discussion on deep subterranean railway systems in urban areas so far has been concentrated on the design or planning level and technological or economic feasibility without significant and detailed analyses of the key factors regarding their acceptability. In technical innovation and policy implementation, though the public has often been slighted as a generalizable entity that tends to confirm to a new technological innovation, recent studies recognize it as a crucial component in successful implementation of a technology (Flynn, 2007; Ricci et al., 2007). When implementing a new transportation system, such as a deep subterranean railway system in urban areas, it is very plausible that the major barriers may lie in the field of public acceptability rather than that of the technical issues. As previous acceptability analyses for road pricing, alternative fuel-technologies, and information technologies indicate, introduction of a new transportation service and policy implementation also has to acknowledge and deal with complex social sentiments and public attitudes toward the likely consequences the new technology may bring to the quality of life, such as air quality, health risks, environmental comfort and safety. Therefore, it is important to estimate not only the current level of awareness of deep subterranean railway system in terms of technological features, depth, construction location, and performance, but also the public’s perception on the issues that are felt to be of immediate interest to them, such as convenience and safety concerns and environmental concerns. Once the technological issues are solved and public attitudes are identified, the challenge is then to persuade and moderate conflicting opinions from supporters and opponents. Although a deep subterranean railway system can provide high-speed rail transportation service in congested urban areas, users who feel the emotional stress from concerns of safety and security and the inconvenience in accessing and transferring to deep stations can oppose it. Therefore, the introduction of a deep subterranean railway system and policy direction should be based on the analysis of public acceptability. 3. Deep subterranean railway system As described above, there have been various restrictions on developing deep subterranean railway systems in urban areas. However, technological advancements and saturated development of shallow underground space led to the increasing need for deep subterranean railway systems in urban areas. As a result, these systems are under the planning and/or design level in Japan, China, Switzerland, France, and Korea. However, the definition of the term ‘deep’ varies among the countries. For example, the ‘‘Special Committee for the Utilization of Deep Underground Spaces,’’ which was formed within the Prime Minister’s Office of Japan in 1995, defined the scope of deep underground space as the space of a level of over 40 m below underground level (Takasaki et al., 2000). Based on the activities of this Committee, the Special Measures Act for Public Use of Deep Underground was enacted in 2000 (Chikahisa et al., 2004; Dobashi et al., 2008). A similar act for deep underground use with the same definition is under consideration in Korea. Additionally, the Korean Government has decided to construct the deep-underground Great Train eXpress (GTX) at a depth of 40 m below the urban ground level (Kim et al., 2011; Lee et al., 2010; Park et al., 2010, 2012). Fig. 1 shows a schematic layout of deep subterranean railway systems in urban areas like a GTX in Korea, which is based on the figure by Takasaki et al. (2000). As shown in Fig. 1, since current geotechnologies and related science and engineering fields make it possible to use deep underground space to support livable, resilient, and sustainable cities (NRC, 2013), the deep subterranean railway systems are expected to have a high degree of feasibility and realization in Korea as well as in other counties.
Y. Chung, H. Kim / Transportation Research Part A 77 (2015) 82–94
85
Fig. 1. Schematic layout of deep subterranean railway system in urban areas.
4. Acceptability analysis 4.1. Conceptual model and hypotheses Although the deep subterranean railway system may be feasible in perspective of engineering and economics, it can meet opponents due to the low level of awareness regarding the system, the emotional concerns and anxiety regarding the underground infrastructure security and safety, the inconvenience regarding the accessibility of deep stations, and environmental issues such as noise and vibration. In addition, acceptable consciousness of GTX can be considered with respect to public and private aspects: ‘‘public aspect’’ in that GTX would serve the public interest without infringing on private property, and ‘‘private aspect’’ in that it affects one’s economic and environmental profit and loss by having GTX under one’s neighboring or residential area. Based on the above hypothesized relationships, this study proposes the conceptual model as shown in Fig. 2, and the hypotheses are as follows: Hypothesis 1. Awareness of GTX is positively related to its acceptability. Awareness refers to the level of public knowledge of the basic information about the deep subterranean railway system. According to previous studies, awareness of new transportation policies or systems has been found to be positively related to their acceptability (Eriksson et al., 2006; Jaensirisak et al., 2005; O’Garra et al., 2005; Piriyawat et al., 2009). Hypothesis 2. Inconvenience and instability concerns regarding the GTX are negatively related to its acceptability. Inconvenience and instability concern is a measure of a comparison between peoples’ expectations for GTX and actual satisfaction of existing subway systems, in terms of accessibility, transfer, and safety. It is found that transit passengers’ satisfaction depends on accessibility to railway stations, travel comfort, and safety (Brons et al., 2009; Eboli and Mazzulla, 2007, 2012; Tyrinopoulos and Antoniou, 2013). Hypothesis 3. Environmental concern regarding noise and vibration generated by the GTX is negatively related to its acceptability. Since the GTX can be operated under the residential or business areas rather than under the existing roadways, the associative communities could feel that it could generate annoying noise and vibration. Therefore, this issue could have a negative impact on introducing the GTX.
86
Y. Chung, H. Kim / Transportation Research Part A 77 (2015) 82–94
Fig. 2. The conceptual model.
4.2. Survey design and data collection Based on the conceptual model and hypotheses described above, the questionnaire was composed of four parts: (1) the basic information about the deep subterranean railway system, (2) the perceived inconvenience and instability of the system, (3) environmental issues such as noise and vibration, and (4) public acceptability. Since the acceptability for a public policy or system can be significantly influenced by the psychological factor of fairness and infringement on freedom (Baron, 1995; Baron and Jurney, 1993; Fujii et al., 2004), the fourth part was divided into public and private aspects.3 Therefore, the factors and variables that influence the acceptability of the deep subterranean railway system are identified and grouped into four categories. They include awareness factors, inconvenience and instability factors, environmental factors, and acceptability factors. Data collection from the respondents was conducted through a telephone-based survey of residents in the vicinity of the planned GTX from September 7 to 30, 2009. Specifically, this study targeted the respondents who reside within 3 km of the planned GTX line, and are the potential GTX users. A total of 506 samples were collected, and their demographic information is shown in Table 1. From the survey, about 70% of the respondents answered that they take a neutral or opposing attitude to introducing the deep subterranean railway systems. Table 2 shows the contents of the questionnaire with respect to the factors. In addition, the results of factor analysis and Cronbach’s alpha values are presented in Table 2. Cronbach alpha values were calculated to assess the internal consistency in extracted factors. In general, the values of 0.6–0.7 can be considered as the lower limit of acceptability (Hair et al., 2006). However, as seen in Table 2, the Cronbach alpha value with respect to inconvenience and instability factor was just 0.501. Moreover, the factor loading value of the seismic risk related indicator was very low (0.18). Therefore, in spite of the constructed conceptual model and hypothesis, we modified the second hypothesis. That is, the instability concern has been separated from the inconvenience and instability factors. As a result, the Cronbach’s alpha value with respect to inconvenience factor was increased to 0.715. However, we applied other environment related variables for the acceptability analysis for the purpose of this study, which is to identify in advance the barrier factors of the deep subterranean railway systems, and to suggest public policy direction to mitigate public opposition. 4.3. Descriptive statistics 4.3.1. Awareness factor The results of the survey regarding the awareness level for GTX construction is presented in Fig. 3. The awareness of the planned GTX lines was 29.6% (26.3% + 3.3%), while the awareness of more detailed information such as speed and increase in the number of transfer was lower at 18.0% (14.2% + 3.8%), 11.5% (8.5% + 3.0%) respectively. Interestingly, the awareness level for its construction at a depth of 40 m below the urban ground level was low, at 23.1% (19.0% + 4.0%), whereas the awareness level for its construction possibly under the ground of the general buildings was much lower, at 18.0% (14.8% + 3.2%). 4.3.2. Inconvenience factor Fig. 4 represents the results of the survey regarding inconvenience and instability for using the GTX. Since the GTX is constructed at a depth of 40 m below the urban ground level, its use is assumed to cause great inconvenience for passengers 3 The private aspect implies the acceptability when GTX passes under the private real estate such as respondent’s land and buildings. On the other hand, the public aspect implies the acceptability when GTX passes under public facilities or non-residential commercial buildings such as shopping center and office buildings.
87
Y. Chung, H. Kim / Transportation Research Part A 77 (2015) 82–94 Table 1 Demographic information of respondents. Total
Samples
Percentage
506
100
Gender
Male Female
229 277
45 55
Age
20s 30s 40s 50s Over 60s
34 100 154 125 102
6.7 19.8 28.7 24.7 20.2
Occupation
Employee Private business Housewife Etc.
144 132 168 62
28.5 26.1 33.2 12.3
Residential area
Seoul Gyeonggi Incheon
327 88 91
64.6 17.4 18.0
Table 2 Contents of the questionnaire. Questions Awareness factors (scaled in 3 levels: unknown, heard, and well known) – There is planning for lines of GTX in Seoul Metropolitan Area – The average speed of GTX will be about 100 km/h – The number of transfer times could be increased – GTX will be constructed at a depth of 40 m below the urban ground level (GL) – GTX will be constructed at a depth of 40 m below the GL of the urban buildingsa Inconvenience and instability factor (scaled in 5 levels from very high to very low) – The accessibility of GTX could be inconvenient, compared to existing subways – The transfer of GTX could be inconvenient, compared to existing subways – GTX could be unsafe for various disasters such a seismic events Environmental factor (scaled in 5 levels from never to very high) – GTX could make more noise than existing subways – GTX could make more vibration than existing subways Acceptability (scaled in 5 levels from impossible to possible) – GTX is acceptable in public – GTX is acceptable in private
Mean
Standard deviation
Factor loading
1.33 1.22 1.14 1.27 1.21
0.024 0.022 0.019 0.023 0.021
0.94 0.96 0.92 0.98 0.97
3.12 3.18 3.56
0.075 0.068 0.073
0.83 0.83 0.18
3.14 3.31
0.074 0.059
0.66 0.86
2.76 2.42
0.046 0.118
0.90 0.89
Cronbach’s alpha 0.935
0.501
0.542
0.832
a Although this question seems to be similar to the fourth question of awareness factors, this question is notionally different in that some people may know GTX will be constructed at a depth of 40 m below the urban ground level, but not below urban buildings.
Fig. 3. Result on awareness level of GTX.
making transfers. The results of the survey are considerably consistent with the researchers’ intuitive assumption: inconvenience factors for accessibility and transferring are measured to be, respectively, 66.8% and 71%, with transferring being higher than accessibility. In case of the awareness of the instability factor, 50.7% of the respondents believe that the GTX is unsafe—reflecting common folk misconception contrary to the technological research that finds that underground systems are in fact safer than surface systems in a seismic event.
88
Y. Chung, H. Kim / Transportation Research Part A 77 (2015) 82–94
Fig. 4. Result on inconvenience and instability level of GTX.
Fig. 5. Result on environmental concern level of GTX.
4.3.3. Environmental factor The result of the survey regarding noise and vibration caused by the GTX is presented in Fig. 5. As there is a folk misconception of instability in the occurrence of a seismic event, 53.3% of the respondents expressed worries about vibration and 36.8% about noise, although the noise and vibration caused by the GTX do not reach the surface. 4.3.4. Acceptability factor Lastly, as the results of the survey regarding acceptability presented in Fig. 6 show, 45.7% of the respondents opposed the GTX when the location for its construction is not under or around the respondent’s residence (i.e., public acceptability), whereas the opposition rose to 63.0% when the GTX goes directly through underground the respondent’s residence (private acceptability). The results come from the respondents’ anticipation of the increase in land value in the vicinity of the GTX line because a new transit line generally leads to the increase in land value (e.g., Cervero and Kang, 2011; Golias, 2002; McDonald and Osuji, 1995; Pagliara and Papa, 2011). Therefore, there is a conflict between interest in increasing land value and worries about noise and vibration for the residents who live in the vicinity of the planned GTX line. If the line passes under private property, they are more opposed to the GTX. As individual’s attitude toward a policy involves an inner conflict or negotiation between maximizing individual gain and pursuing public interest (e.g., Dawes, 1980; Kollock, 1998; Lichbach, 1996; Poteete et al., 2010; Vatn, 2005), this aspect needs to be reflected in the policy-making in the way they do not perceive themselves as losing on the issue and the construction of GTS as undesired personal loss.
Fig. 6. Result on acceptability level of GTX.
Y. Chung, H. Kim / Transportation Research Part A 77 (2015) 82–94
89
5. Multivariate analysis for public acceptability 5.1. Structural equation modeling This study used structural equation modeling (SEM) to identify the relationship between acceptability and its causal factors. SEM is a statistical method for testing and estimated causal relations using combination of statistical data and qualitative causal assumptions, and it is widely used in psychology, sociology, the biological sciences, educational research, political science, market research, and travel behavior research (Golob, 2003). SEM may be used as a more powerful alternative to multiple regression, path analysis, factor analysis, time series analysis, and analysis of covariance, indicating that these methods may be viewed as special cases of SEM. Generally, advantages of SEM compared to multivariate statistical methods include more flexible assumptions-particularly allowing interpretation even in the face of multicollinearity, the use of confirmatory factor analysis to reduce measurement error by having multiple indicators per latent variable, the attractiveness of SEM’s graphical modeling interface, the desirability of testing models overall rather than coefficients individually, the ability to test models with multiple dependents, the ability to test coefficients across multiple between-subjects groups, and the ability to handle difficult data such as time series with autocorrelated error, non-normal data, and incomplete data. An SEM is composed of two main components as shown in Fig. 7: (1) a measurement model, and (2) a structural model. The measurement model describes the relationships between observed variables and the constructs these variables are hypothesized to measure. Therefore, the measurement model of SEM evaluates how well the observed variables combine to identify underlying hypothesized constructs (Weston and Gore, 2006). On the other hand, the structural model describes interrelationships among constructs. Thus, equations in the structural portion of the model specify the hypothesized relationships among latent variables. The explanation of each element in the figure is presented in Table 3. More detailed presentations of SEM and its estimation procedures are discussed in many SEM texts such as Mueller (1996), Kaplan (2000), and Byrne (2001). 5.2. Assessment of an SEM for the acceptability Since an SEM represents a series of hypotheses about how the variables in an analysis are generated and related, the application of the SEM technique starts with the specification of a model to be estimated. Thus, the assessment of Measurement Model
ζ1 δ1
x1
δ2
x2
δ3
x3
λy11
λ x11 λ x12
ξ
γ 11
η
1
1
λy13
βm
λ x13
ξm
λy12
ηm
y1
ε1
y2
ε2
y3
ε3
Structural Model Fig. 7. An SEM structure.
Table 3 Elements of structural equation model. Measurement model
x q 1 column vector of observed exogenous variables y p 1 column vector of observed endogenous variables n n 1 column vector of latent exogenous variables g m 1 column vector of latent endogenous variables d q 1 column vector of measurement error terms for observed variables x e p 1 column vector of measurement error terms for observed variables y KX the matrix (q n) of structural coefficients for latent exogenous variables to their observed indicator variables KY the matrix (p m) of structural coefficients for latent endogenous variables to their observed indicator variables
Structural model
C the matrix (m n) of regression effects for exogenous latent variables to endogenous latent variables B the coefficient matrix (m n) of direct effects between endogenous latent variables n m 1 column vector of the error terms
Covariance matrix
He the covariance matrix (p p) of e Hd the covariance matrix (q q) of d U the covariance matrix (n n) of n W the covariance matrix (m m) of f
90
Y. Chung, H. Kim / Transportation Research Part A 77 (2015) 82–94 Table 4 Statistics for model assessment. Fit index
Fit index
v2
166.9 (p-value = 0.000)
CFI
0.95
Degrees of freedom RMSEA
32 0.08
GFI AGFI
0.97 0.92
goodness-of-fit and the estimation of parameters of the hypothesized model(s) are critical. There are two popular methods to evaluate model fit: (1) the v2 goodness-of-fit statistic assessing the magnitude of discrepancy between the sample and fitted covariance matrices, and (2) fit indices quantifying the degree of fit along a continuum. Generally, the fit criteria of a SEM indicate to what extent the specified model fits the empirical data. Only the v2 goodness-of-fit statistic is available for inferential statistical evaluation of a SEM, while other measures are descriptive. When performing the v2 goodness-of-fit tests, care must be taken in the sample size. That is, the v2 statistic is increasing along with increasing sample size (more than 200). Since the sample size in this study is 506, the v2 statistic could be high. Due to such a possible drawback of the v2 goodness-of-fit test, the descriptive goodness-of-fit measures are supplemented. As for the descriptive goodness-of-fit measures, there have been various studies performed to suggest the conventional cutoff criteria for various fit indices including comparative fit index (CFI), goodness-of-fit index (GFI) and adjusted goodness-of-fit index (AGFI), and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA). Recently, Schermelleh-Engel et al. (2003) recommended some rules of thumb criteria for goodness-of-fit indices. Table 4 shows the statistics for goodness-of-fit tests of the estimated SEM model for the acceptability of the deep subterranean railway system. The degrees of freedom of the model is 32, with a v2 statistic of 166.9 (p-value = 0.000). However, the sample size in this study is comparatively large (506) (i.e., the v2 statistic is high). Thus, the descriptive goodness-of-fit measures are applied as alternatives, and they include CFI, GFI, AGFI, and RMSEA. The cutoff criteria are based on the suggestion by Schermelleh-Engel et al. (2003)-a model with CFI of above 0.95, GFI of above 0.90, AGFI of above 0.85, and RMSEA of less than 0.08 as acceptable. As a result, the goodness-of-fit indices suggest the model fit acceptably (CFI = 0.95; GFI = 0.97; AGFI = 0.92; RMSEA = 0.08). 5.3. An SEM for the acceptability Fig. 8 presents the estimated SEM for the acceptability of the deep subterranean railway systems in urban areas. In the figure, the numbers in the arrows are parameters estimated at the 95% significant level and the numbers in parentheses indicate t-value. Additionally, the asterisk in parentheses indicates fixed parameter to identify the scale of error term. First of all, the awareness of the deep subterranean railway systems has a positive relationship with its acceptability; the coefficient of awareness factors was 0.20. Therefore, it is expected that a publicity campaign for the deep subterranean railway systems could be a critical factor in its successful operation in the future. However, as expected, the acceptability is found to show a negative relationship with environmental factors and inconvenience factors; the coefficient of environmental factors was the same as one of inconvenience factors with 0.32. In addition, the inconvenience and awareness of the deep subterranean railway systems are found to be positive and negative correlation with the environmental factors, respectively. Thus, the environmentally negative effect was found to be higher with the increase in the inconvenience, and it led to reducing the systems’ acceptability. On the other hand, the environmentally negative factors were found to be less with the increase in the level of the awareness. Lastly, as expected, the risk perception of the deep subterranean railway systems’ instability has a negative impact on its awareness as well as its acceptability. Moreover, although the relationship between the instability and the inconvenience factor is positive, the instability consequently has a negative relationship with the systems’ acceptability because the systems’ acceptability is negatively affected by the inconvenience factors. 6. Policy suggestions As the results of the survey indicate, there exists a positive relationship between the public acceptability and the public awareness of the GTX in terms of the subway lines, structures, speed, and transfer, whereas the factors of environment, inconvenience, and instability have a negative impact on its acceptability. While deep subterranean railway systems are technologically feasible and even desirable in terms of land use, the level of the public awareness and attitudes is also critical for the successful introduction of this new transportation service. The public in the contemporary society is ever more sensitive to personal health, technological risk and environmental safety, and this risk perceptions can be greatly influenced by an affective approach that puts special emphasis on the emotional side of the public in making decisions (Flynn, 2007; Slovic, 2000). From this perspective, soft measures such as campaigns and advertisements to enhance public awareness are needed to help the public easily recognize and understand the issues regarding the GTX. Affective awareness campaigns and advertisements are particularly effective, first, to deliver needed and persuasive information from the perspective of public
Y. Chung, H. Kim / Transportation Research Part A 77 (2015) 82–94
91
Fig. 8. Final SEM for the acceptability of the deep subterranean railway systems.
perception (Weiss and Tschirhart, 1994); secondly, to appeal to the public with the issues they react to most emotionally such as safety and environment (Gobe, 2010); and thirdly, to engage with the public in social conversation and have communal dialogue with groups with different opinions (Chung et al., 2012). First, the delivery of accurate information about the deep subterranean railway system is needed to enhance public acceptability. Whereas about 70% of the respondents answered that they would take an opposing or neutral attitude toward the introduction of the deep subterranean railway system, the acceptability was found to be higher with the increase in the awareness level of the system. For one instance, as indicated in the survey results and the SEM results, although the public belief that the GTX could be unsafe during seismic events has highest influence on the survey result (3.56), in fact it has been proven empirically that deeper areas are safer than areas near the surface due to the violent movements at the surface and the attenuation of the seismic waves at the deeper areas (Balaker et al., 2006). Another misconception is found in their assumption that the noise (3.14) and vibration (3.31) caused by the GTX would reach the surface. Therefore, for the success of the new railway system, it is important to respond to and reshape the public mindset through soft measures to inform and educate the public related to the GTX and even to correct their common sense and stereotypical assumptions. Secondly, awareness campaigns and media advertising tend to soften the minds of the general public through emotional factors such as health, protection, safety, and guilt, which are expected to have a pivotal influence on the judgment of the potential users of a service (Goleman, 2000). In modern society, the public considers and decides their preference based on personal concerns and emotional factors; they act not only through rational judgments based on utility and cost, but also through emotional judgments (Gobe, 2010; Maddock and Fulton, 1996). In the short-term, soft measures raise the awareness level of the service and affect the general discourse of the public, and in the long-term, by increasing the value of the service in terms of environment and safety, they sustain the customers’ loyalty and confidence in the service. Therefore, awareness campaigns need to relate the usefulness of the new transportation system regarding its safety and social goals, and give social meaning and significance to the public’s personal decision. In addition, an extensive publicity campaign can help opponents of the GTX understand the social benefits of the deep subterranean railway systems, such as the reduction of road traffic congestion. For the success of the new policy, the public has to participate voluntarily in using the new transportation system. For this, it is important to offer the venue where they can interact and share their opinions and concerns. The provision of sufficient information, the promotion of sense of security and safety, and the interactive dialogue among the supporters, the opponents, and neutral groups can provide a shared context through which they can engage themselves in social goals and the public common (Chung et al., 2012; Roe, 1994). The exposure to information about positive and negative factors related to environmental and safety issues is expected to
92
Y. Chung, H. Kim / Transportation Research Part A 77 (2015) 82–94
build an overall perspective and help understand the groups with different opinions. Through this process, the government must play a leading role in developing active communication by using professional consultants and offering various community workshops and hearings in order to involve those in favor and those against the new policy. More importantly, to enhance policy literacy among the public, the campaign needs to include the full range of individual and social benefits and burdens, including other social and economic factors such as the reduction of traffic congestion, the expected ratio of the usage of the public transportation compared to private vehicles, the land use of neighboring areas, real estate pricing, and regional economy vitalization. Finally, there is an important finding from the SEM results: the inconvenience factors have a positive impact on the environment factors. This result implies the public sensitive to the systems’ inconvenience are also sensitive to the environment issues. Part of this correlation might also be explained by the fact that people that are sensitive to one environmental problem might also be sensitive to other environmental problems (Klæboe et al., 2000). In fact, the inconvenience factors are related to the systems’ technological and operational issues such as station design, platform connections, and train operation technologies. Therefore, increasing the public acceptability of the GTX not only requires soft measures such as awareness campaigns and advertisements, but also technological approaches. For example, an introducing rail operation and networking technology such as mutual direct operations and line switches can reduce the inconvenience of passengers’ transfer and accessibility (Harada et al., 2012; Iwakura et al., 2013). Then, it will also lead to reducing the perception of the environmentally negative factors. 7. Conclusions This study analyzed the public acceptability of a deep subterranean railway system, which will be constructed in the space 40 m below ground level and operated at twice the speed of the existing subway system. Since the success of such a new system depends on the acceptability of the public, a telephone-based survey was conducted for residents in the vicinity of the planned GTX stations or line in the Seoul metropolitan area to examine the key factors that influence the acceptability. The results were all consistent with intuitive expectations. Firstly, the awareness of the deep subterranean railway systems has a positive impact on its acceptability. In addition, the acceptability is found to show a negative relationship with environmental, inconvenient, and unstable factors. Based on public acceptability, soft measures such as awareness campaigns and advertisements are recommended to effectively address and mitigate the concerns and issues raised by the public. Therefore, the advertising campaign for the public needs to be oriented toward reinforcing personal and communal beliefs regarding security and health sine the major opposition comes from worries and assumptions about safety, rather than facts about technology and service. Soft measures are expected to engage the public and identify effective means to inform and educate as well as relieve concerns and uneasiness. The public understanding and participation are as crucial as this new technology can provide solutions to traffic congestion and improving mobility. Additionally, there is an important finding: the inconvenience factors have a positive impact on the environment factors. Thus, the technological improvement to reduce inconvenience factors of the GTX use will lead to reducing its environmentally negative perception as well as to increasing its public acceptability. Since this study was only focused on users, further research is needed to compare its economic efficiency with the construction of other alternative transportation systems such as roadways, surface railways, and similar subway systems. Acknowledgment This work was supported by the Korea Transport Institute Research Grant in 2009. References Balaker, T., Moore, A.T., Passantino, G., Poole, R.W., Summers, A., Wang, L., 2006. Addressing California’s Transportation Needs: Problems with Proposition 1B and Alternative Approaches. Reason Foundation, Los Angeles, CA. Baron, J., 1995. Blind justice: fairness to groups and the do-no-harm principle. J. Behav. Decis. Making 8, 71–83. Baron, J., Jurney, J., 1993. Norms against voting for coerced reform. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 64, 347. Bobylev, N., 2008. Urbanization and environmental security. In: Liotta, P.H., Mouat, D., Kepner, W., Lancaster, J. (Eds.), Environmental Change and Human Security: Recognizing and Acting on Hazard Impacts. Springer, Netherlands, pp. 203–216. Bobylev, N., 2009. Mainstreaming sustainable development into a city’s Master plan: a case of urban underground space use. Land Use Policy 26, 1128– 1137. Brons, M., Givoni, M., Rietveld, P., 2009. Access to railway stations and its potential in increasing rail use. Transport. Res. Part A: Policy Pract. 43, 136–149. Byrne, B.M., 2001. Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ. Cervero, R., Kang, C.D., 2011. Bus rapid transit impacts on land uses and land values in Seoul, Korea. Transp. Policy 18, 102–116. Chikahisa, H., Chida, S., Tamura, H., 2004. Applications and Problems of the Underground Space Use in Japan Tunnel Association. Singapore. Chow, F., Kjekstad, O., Paul, T., 2002. Hidden Aspects of Urban Planning: Surface and Underground Development. Thomas Telford. Chung, Y., Song, T., Park, J., 2012. Freeway booking policy: public discourse and acceptability analysis. Transp. Policy 24, 223–231. Cools, M., Brijs, K., Tormans, H., Moons, E., Janssens, D., Wets, G., 2011. The socio-cognitive links between road pricing acceptability and changes in travelbehavior. Transport. Res. Part A: Policy Pract. 45, 779–788. Dawes, R.M., 1980. Social dilemmas. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 31, 169–193. Derrible, S., Kennedy, C., 2009. Network analysis of world subway systems using updated graph theory. Transport. Res. Rec.: J. Transport. Res. Board 2112, 17–25.
Y. Chung, H. Kim / Transportation Research Part A 77 (2015) 82–94
93
Dobashi, H., Hatsuku, T., Ichimura, T., Hori, M., Yamada, T., Ohbo, N., Moriguchi, M., Itami, H., 2008. Full 3D Seismic Response Analysis of Underground Ramp Tunnel Structure Using Large-Scale Numerical Computation. In: Proceedings of The 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Eboli, L., Mazzulla, G., 2007. Service quality attributes affecting customer satisfaction for bus transit. J. Public Transport. 10, 21–34. Eboli, L., Mazzulla, G., 2012. Structural equation modelling for analysing passengers’ perceptions about railway services. Proc. – Soc. Behav. Sci. 54, 96–106. Eliasson, J., Jonsson, L., 2011. The unexpected ‘‘yes’’: explanatory factors behind the positive attitudes to congestion charges in Stockholm. Transp. Policy 18, 636–647. Eriksson, L., Garvill, J., Nordlund, A.M., 2006. Acceptability of travel demand management measures: the importance of problem awareness, personal norm, freedom, and fairness. J. Environ. Psychol. 26, 15–26. Flynn, R., 2007. Risk and the public acceptance of new technologies. In: Flynn, R., Bellaby, P. (Eds.), Risk and the Public Acceptance of New Technologies. Palgrave MacMillan, Basingstoke, Hampshire and New York, pp. 1–23. Fujii, S., Gärling, T., Jakobsson, C., Jou, R.-C., 2004. A cross-country study of fairness and infringement on freedom as determinants of car owners’ acceptance of road pricing. Transportation 31, 285–295. Gobe, M., 2010. Emotional Branding: The New Paradigm for Connecting Brands to People, Updated and Revised ed. Allworth Press, New York, NY. Goleman, D., 2000. Working with Emotional Intelligence, Reprinted ed. Bantam, New York, New York. Golias, J.C., 2002. Analysis of traffic corridor impacts from the introduction of the new Athens Metro system. J. Transp. Geogr. 10, 91–97. Golob, T.F., 2003. Structural equation modeling for travel behavior research. Transport. Res. Part B: Methodol. 37, 1–25. Goto, T., 2001. New stations based on philosophical reunion of diversed technologies. Jpn. Railway Transp. Rev. 28, 32–41. Hair, J.F., Tatham, R.L., Anderson, R.E., Black, W., 2006. Multivariate Data Analysis. Pearson Prentice Hall Upper Saddle River, NJ. Harada, M., Mori, H., Osonoi, H., Ohira, T., Koike, T., Iwama, N., 2012. Shinkansen Traffic Management System for Mutual Direct Operation of Sanyo Shinkansen and Kyushu Shinkansen. Hitachi Review. Hitachi Ltd, Tokyo, Japan, pp. 331–335. Hashash, Y.M.A., Hook, J.J., Schmidt, B., I-Chiang Yao, J., 2001. Seismic design and analysis of underground structures. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 16, 247– 293. Iwakura, S., Kawamura, K., Tsunoda, R., Takahashi, I., 2013. A Multi Agent Simulation Model for Estimating Knock-on Train Delays under High-Frequency Urban Rail Operation. In: Proceedings of Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies. Jaensirisak, S., Wardman, M., May, A.D., 2005. Explaining variations in public acceptability of road pricing schemes. J. Transp. Econ. Policy 39, 127–153. Kaplan, D., 2000. Structural Equation Modeling: Foundations and Extensions. Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA. Kim, C.Y., Yim, S.B., Jang, S.H., Lee, S.W., Kim, K.Y., Park, K.H., 2011. Urban deep road tunnel construction project in Korea and technical requirements. Proc. Eng. 14, 3151–3154. Klæboe, R., Kolbenstvedt, M., Clench-Aas, J., Bartonova, A., 2000. Oslo traffic study – part 1: an integrated approach to assess the combined effects of noise and air pollution on annoyance. Atmos. Environ. 34, 4727–4736. Kollock, P., 1998. Social dilemmas: the anatomy of cooperation. Ann. Rev. Sociol., 183–214 Kottenhoff, K., Freij, K.B., 2009. The role of public transport for feasibility and acceptability of congestion charging – the case of Stockholm. Transport. Res. Part A: Policy Pract. 43, 297–305. Koyama, Y., 1997. Railway construction in Japan. Jpn. Railway Transp. Rev. 32, 36–41. Lee, H.W., Park, C.B., Lee, B.S., Park, H.J., 2010. Exit end Effect Reduction of a Linear Induction Motor for the Deep-Underground GTX. In: Proceedings of Electrical Machines (ICEM), 2010 XIX International Conference on, pp. 1–4. Li, H.-Q., Parriaux, A., Thalmann, P., Li, X.-Z., 2013a. An integrated planning concept for the emerging underground urbanism: Deep City Method Part 1 concept, process and application. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 38, 559–568. Li, H., Li, X., Parriaux, A., Thalmann, P., 2013b. An integrated planning concept for the emerging underground urbanism: Deep City Method Part 2 case study for resource supply and project valuation. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 38, 569–580. Lichbach, M.I., 1996. The Cooperator’s Dilemma. University of Michigan Press. Maddock, R.C., Fulton, R.L., 1996. Marketing to the Mind. Right Brain Strategies for Advertising and Marketing Greenwood Publishing Group, Westport, CT. McDonald, J.F., Osuji, C.I., 1995. The effect of anticipated transportation improvement on residential land values. Reg. Sci. Urban Econ. 25, 261–278. Mueller, R., 1996. Basic Principles of Structural Equation Modeling: An Introduction to LISREL and EQS. Springer, New York. NRC, 2013. Underground Engineering for Sustainable Urban Development. The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C. O’Garra, T., Mourato, S., Pearson, P., 2005. Analysing awareness and acceptability of hydrogen vehicles: a London case study. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 30, 649– 659. O’Garra, T., Mourato, S., Garrity, L., Schmidt, P., Beerenwinkel, A., Altmann, M., Hart, D., Graesel, C., Whitehouse, S., 2007. Is the public willing to pay for hydrogen buses? A comparative study of preferences in four cities. Energy Policy 35, 3630–3642. Oxley, P.R., 1996. Elderly drivers and safety when using IT systems. IATSS Res. 20, 102–110. Pagliara, F., Papa, E., 2011. Urban rail systems investments: an analysis of the impacts on property values and residents’ location. J. Transp. Geogr. 19, 200– 211. Park, C.-B., Lee, B.-S., Lee, J., 2010. A study on the applicability of the conventional TTX propulsion system on the high-speed propulsion system for a deepunderground GTX. Int. J. Railway 3, 54–59. Park, C.-B., Lee, H.-W., Lee, J., 2012. Performance analysis of the linear induction motor for the deep-underground high-speed GTX. J. Electr. Eng. Technol. 7, 200–206. Piriyawat, S., Van, H.T., Fujii, S., 2009. The roles of perceived effectiveness and problem awareness in the acceptability of road pricing in Bangkok. Sonklanakarin J. Sci. Technol. 31, 181. Poteete, A.R., Janssen, M.A., Ostrom, E., 2010. Working Together: Collective Action, the Commons, and Multiple Methods in Practice. Princeton University Press. Pridmore, A., Miola, A., 2011. Public Acceptability of Sustainable Transport Measures: A Review of the Literature. 2011 International Transport Forum. OECD, Leipzig, Germany, p. 24. Regan, M.A., Mitsopoulos, E., Haworth, N., Young, K., 2002. Acceptability of In-Vehicle Intelligent Transport Systems to Victorian Car Drivers. Monash University Accident Research Centre, Clayton, Victoria. Ricci, M., Bellaby, P., Flynn, R., 2007. Stakeholders’ and publics’ perceptions of hydrogen energy technologies. In: Flynn, R., Bellaby, P. (Eds.), Risk and the Public Acceptance of New Technologies. Palgrave MacMillan, Basingstoke, Hampshire and New York, NY, pp. 175–197. Roe, E., 1994. Narrative Policy Analysis: Theory and Practice. Duke University Press, Durham, NC. Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., Müller, H., 2003. Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: tests of significance and descriptive goodness-offit measures. Methods Psychol. Res. Online 8, 23–74. Slovic, P.E., 2000. The Perception of Risk. Earthscan Publications. Takasaki, H., Chikahisa, H., Yuasa, Y., 2000. Planning and mapping of subsurface space in Japan. Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol. 15, 287–301. Tarigan, A.K.M., Bayer, S.B., Langhelle, O., Thesen, G., 2012. Estimating determinants of public acceptance of hydrogen vehicles and refuelling stations in greater Stavanger. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 37, 6063–6073. Thesen, G., Langhelle, O., 2008. Awareness, acceptability and attitudes towards hydrogen vehicles and filling stations: a Greater Stavanger case study and comparisons with London. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 33, 5859–5867. Tyrinopoulos, Y., Antoniou, C., 2013. Factors affecting modal choice in urban mobility. Eur. Transp. Res. Rev. 5, 27–39. Vatn, A., 2005. Rationality, institutions and environmental policy. Ecol. Econ. 55, 203–217.
94
Y. Chung, H. Kim / Transportation Research Part A 77 (2015) 82–94
Vlassenroot, S., Brookhuis, K., Marchau, V., Witlox, F., 2010. Towards defining a unified concept for the acceptability of Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS): a conceptual analysis based on the case of Intelligent Speed Adaptation (ISA). Transport. Res. Part F: Traffic Psychol. Behav. 13, 164–178. Webster, G.S., 1914. Subterranean street planning. Ann. Am. Acad. Polit. Soc. Sci. 51, 200–207. Weiss, J.A., Tschirhart, M., 1994. Public information campaigns as policy instruments. J. Policy Anal. Manage. 13, 82–119. Weston, R., Gore, P.A., 2006. A brief guide to structural equation modeling. Counsel. Psychol. 34, 719–751. Yetano Roche, M., Mourato, S., Fischedick, M., Pietzner, K., Viebahn, P., 2010. Public attitudes towards and demand for hydrogen and fuel cell vehicles: a review of the evidence and methodological implications. Energy Policy 38, 5301–5310.