recent developments in demand responsive transport: itls

The University of Sydney

Recent developments in Demand Responsive Transport: The view form Europe

ITLS Policy and Leadership Seminar, 7th August 2019

Presented byJohn D NelsonChair in Public TransportInstitute of Transport and Logistics Studies (ITLS)The University of Sydney Business [email protected]


Outline

1. Flexible and Demand Responsive Transport Services– What is FTS and how has it evolved?

2. Success factors from Europe3. The case of Kutsuplus4. FTS – future prospects


1. Flexible and Demand Responsive Transport Services

– Flexible Transport Services (FTS) are public transport services which cover a broad range of mobility products - usually operated with small capacity vehicles.

– Differentiating factor…. One or more dimensions of the service can be adjusted to meet the actual needs of the user– Route– Vehicle– Operator– Passenger– Payment

– This makes an already complex provision more complex


Increasing flexibility

operator Contracted Commercial

vehicleAvailable all day

One type of vehicle Many types of vehicle

Available for only part of the day

Special transport services e.g. CTpassenger General

public onlyNo

restrictions

Pay on Vehiclepayment Pay in advance Smartcard

routeFixed months in

advanceFixed one hour

before trip One day in advance


Selected one hour before trip


Evolution of FTS (how we saw things in 2004…)

One service providerOne Agency (TDC)

“Dial-a-ride” Manual booking and assignmentPrevious day (or earlier) booking most likely

One service providerOne Agency (TDC)

ITS supported servicesOn-day booking likely

Multiple service providersOne Agency (TDC)

ITS supported servicesOn-day booking likely

Multiple service providersMultiple Agencies optimise across modes & services

ITS supported services: On-day booking likely

Basic

Expanded and Mature Agency

Standalone

Interacting Agencies

Breakthrough in ITS technology

Breakthrough in B2B/B2C platform

Breakthrough in Business Model/transport organisation

Proven

Proven

Proven

Emerging

Source: EU FP6 FAMS project


FTS can take many forms

– General use services– Local and feeder services to trunk haul services– Replacing low-frequency conventional services– Replacing fixed routes in evening or weekends– Dedicated/special services, restricted to certain users– Services in low-density rural areas– Efficiencies in social mobility resources– Niche urban markets– Fuzzy line between small bus and big taxi

– Applications across Europe (and elsewhere) have been quite diverse


Development of Large Scale FTS

Source: Yngve Westerlund (2016)


Tyne and Wear, UK Urban DRT for all






public onlyNo

restrictions





http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/93/LinkUp_Logo.png


Belbus






public onlyNo

restrictions



advanceFixed two hour



Regiotaxi, The Netherlands






public onlyNo

restrictions






Rural Wheels, Cumbria UK






public onlyNo

restrictions





Source: Cumbria County Council UK


CallConnect, Lincolnshire




before trip

vehicle

Special transport services e.g. CT

Available all day



passenger


General public only

No restrictions

One day in advance

Interconnect is a quality network of connecting local bus services designed to improve transport links to destinations throughout Lincolnshire

Feeder services help secure viability of fixed route services


2. Success factors – lessons from Europe

– Explored Taxis as part of the (flexible) public transport mix– mainland European schemes required LESS subsidy than UK schemes

• % of Cost to Scheme ManagerUK – 65% to 93%Rest of Europe – 30% to 60%

– Mainland European schemes more extensive spatial coverage and larger schemes

– UK Commission for Integrated Transport (CFiT) study

Rural Wheels, Cumbria

Devon Fare Car

Connect2 Whiltshire

Publicar, Switzerland

Billilinks, West Sussex

Taxitub, France

Anruf Sammel taxi, Germany

North Sutherland subsidised taxis

Regiotaxi, Netherlands

Treintaxi, Netherlands

Rural Wheels, Cumbria

Devon Fare Car

Connect2 Whiltshire

Publicar, Switzerland

Billilinks, West Sussex

Taxitub, France

Anruf Sammel taxi, Germany

North Sutherland subsidised taxis

Regiotaxi, Netherlands

Treintaxi, Netherlands

Source: CfIT (2008)

Commission for Integrated Transport (CFiT), (2008) A New Approach to Rural Public Transport. Available for download (with supporting studies) from http://cfit.independent.gov.uk/pubs/2008/rpt/index.htm

http://cfit.independent.gov.uk/pubs/2008/rpt/index.htm


The evidence

Scale of operation: passenger trips

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Regiot

axi (n

ation

al)

TreinT

axi (n

ation

al)

AST (sub

-regio

nal)

TaxiTUB (s

ub-re

giona

l)

Conne

ct2 (4

sche

mes)

Devon F

are Car

(Cou

nty)

Rural W

heels

(Cou

nty)

N. Suth

erlan

d (1 s

chem

e)

BilliLink

s (1 s

chem

e)

Scheme

Tota

l cos

t

Annual subsidyAnnual Fare Income

Economics of large scale schemes generally better

£0£2£4£6£8

£10£12£14£16

Trei

nTax

i(n

atio

nal)

AST

(sub

-re

gion

al)

Taxi

TUB

(sub

-re

gion

al)

Con

nect

2(4

sche

mes

)

Dev

on F

are

Car

(Cou

nty)

Rur

alW

heel

s(C

ount

y)

N.

Suth

erla

nd(1

sch

eme)

Billi

Link

s(1

sch

eme)

Scheme

pass

enge

r sub

sidy

per

jour

ney

(£)

Subsidy per passenger (Mainland Europe) Subsidy per passenger (UK)

Subsidy per passenger lower for large schemes

Source: CfIT (2008)


Success factors – conclusions (CfIT)

– The evidence suggests – Exploitation of economies of scale are possible for larger schemes– Larger schemes only require moderate level of subsidy

– Conclusions– Large schemes (both in actual and spatial scale) seem necessary to

exploit economies of scale. – These are easier if institutional framework plans exist at least regionally– Maturity appears to be important to generate patronage– A national scheme for the UK could be provided without significantly

adding to subsidy budget


Towards Good Practice – 3 key factors

– Develop an economic framework.– Gives a clear method for thinking about the nature of costs and provides a rationale for

linking revenues to costs. – When flexible services often described as not ‘viable’ – usually means ‘costs too much’

• The costs exceed the revenues (even taking account of subsidy) • But which costs and which revenues? • Different time horizons – should a service be started, continued or stopped? – and

the need here to use an avoidable cost framework

– Service Design is a critical stage ideally developed with stakeholders the travelling public, the operator and the funder

– There needs to be:– A willingness for key actors to be flexible – Comprehensive user requirements undertaken– Awareness of the constraints involved (space, time, type of vehicle, payment

method)

– Awareness Raising:– The more flexible a service becomes the less visible it is to the end user.

– Customers like the familiarity of bus type and route branding– Conventional marketing techniques need to be supplemented by aggressive marketing of

the FTS product.

https://eprint.ncl.ac.uk/file_store/production/12981/B9C57C8D-4AD9-4ED6-80E7-C05258B34516.pdf

https://eprint.ncl.ac.uk/file_store/production/12981/B9C57C8D-4AD9-4ED6-80E7-C05258B34516.pdf


3. The case of Kutsuplus, Helsinki (“Call Plus”)

– The service started in October 2012 with 10 microbuses, with an additional five vehicles added in November 2013. Discontinued end of 2015.

– Used a combination of technologies (automated vehicle location, trip combination optimization, vehicle routing, and travel time estimates). Users received trip offer(s) by requesting a trip via browser-based interface or via SMS.

– Service was stop-to-stop, without requiring transfer between vehicles.

– There were about 1,000 bus stops in the area; supplemented with around 50 virtual stops in places where the density of the regular bus stops was too low, or to account for special case situations.

– At the start of the pilot the operating time was weekdays 9:00 - 17:00, later extended to 7:30 - 18:30, 6:00 - 23:00, and 6:00 - 24:00.

Source: blogs.aalto.fi


Kutsuplus, Helsinki

– There were several service classes across the pilot period. Trip pricing was based on the fixed starting fee, and the km price calculated as the direct distance between origin and destination.

– The service classes differed in flexibility (economy, fast, “happy hour”).

– Av fare of around €5.5 / trip (av PT trip = €3)

– Group discounts offered.

– 100,000 trips, 55,000 annual vehicle hours and 1.8 trips / veh-hour (2015).

– The service was subsidized by the member municipalities of the HSL region (€16/trip).

Source: hsl.fi


Kutsuplus coverage area

Kutsuplus coverage area (Background map © Open Street Map)

9 km radius of the city centre roughly delimited by the inner ring road


Kutsuplus – user survey

1440 respondents – on-line survey

Example of user input of trip origins and destinations


Kutsuplus use in relation to Age and Income


Kutsuplus – trip purpose


Kutsuplus – desire lines

– The highest concentration of origins and destinations were in the inner city, especially the central business district. – Other hotspots are the university, business and residential areas.– In general, the peripheral areas had fewer origins and destinations, Otaniemi being the main exception.– A majority of the trips were made between and within the three central areas and the Otaniemi area.– Trips orbital or transversal to the city centre were fairly uncommon.


Kutsuplus – opinions (by income category)


Kutsuplus – opinions(by income category)


Kutsuplus – overall evaluation

– A range of positive features:– Complementary to public transport in areas of low public transport accessibility; – Low cost for the end user; – Fast travel compared to public transport;– Reduction in car-related issues, such as finding parking; – Easy to absorb into travel behaviour once familiar with service; – Benefit for special groups users (e.g., travelling with luggage, sending children); – Riding comfort and amenities in the vehicle, including real-time information; – Safety during travelling; – Friendly staff; – Innovative PT service.

– But ultimately, HSL deemed the level of subsidy too high– Scale brings economic benefits but requires funding to achieve


Kutsuplus – lessons from the evaluation

– Lessons learned– financial obstacles were arguably just the tip of the iceberg

– user requirements analysis – significant effort required…

– marketing strategy should reflect the end user target group. The lack of marketing was one of the main failures (a common misperception was that this was a service for the elderly, as STS vehicles are similar).

– service usability and integration: FTS should use web, SMS and smart phone app-based booking systems, as well as enabling pre-ordering more than 45 minutes in advance.

– Remember the 3 key factors of good practice:– Economic Framework – Service Design – Marketing

Reference: Weckström, C et al (2019) User Perspectives on Emerging Mobility Services: Ex Post Analysis of Kutsuplus Pilot. Research in Transportation Business and Management. 27, 84-97.


4. FTS – future prospects

– Create FTS areas that are geographically large enough to reap economies of scale using smaller vehicles as part of public transport mix

– Convert low demand fixed services to FTS – either by geographical area or by time of day to reduce variable costs

– Rebalance networks to increase frequency on core routes and use FTS for access

– Implement vehicle brokerage between authorities and agencies to reap economies of scale

– Scheduling and booking system used to get most appropriate vehicle for journey requested

– Find commercial niches to use spare capacity, e.g.– At employment shift changeover– Evenings and weekends– Education– Leisure and retail

– Pay attention to marketing the product

recent developments in demand responsive transport: itls

Documents