Journal of Transport and Land Use

Public transport strategy: Minimal service vs. competitor to the car

Cecília Silva

University of Porto

Catarina Cadima

FEUP University of Porto – Faculty of Engineering; CITTA Research Centre for Transport, Territory and Environment

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4969-5013

Nayanne Castro

FEUP University of Porto – Faculty of Engineering; CITTA Research Centre for Transport, Territory and Environment

Aud Tennoy

TOI Institute of Transport Economics

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2021.1982

---

Abstract

With regard to public policy for public transport services, two dominant approaches are found: the provision of minimal services to the car-less population, or the provision of a service that competes directly with the car (in terms of time, cost, convenience, etc.). Increased acknowledgement of the need to mitigate traffic growth and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions has led to a growing need to shift from the former to the latter, encouraging the use of public transport.

This paper sets out to explore whether competitiveness with the car is a priority for the public transport planning of medium-sized European cities, as well as whether the change in European regulation (European Commission, 2007) has managed to contribute to the acceptance of this priority. In this study, we take a closer look at a country undergoing significant regulatory and procedural transformations. An exploratory analysis is conducted regarding plans, actions, and development projects in recent years in four Portuguese municipalities. Relevant planners and transport authorities are interviewed on matters such as how local policies and plans favor public transport; how the planning process was implemented; the actors involved; and the support tools used to achieve the established goals.

The findings reveal that relative competitiveness of public transport is considered important by planning practitioners. Nevertheless, other concerns seem to be more timely, such as, providing minimal services, restructuring existing networks, and budget constraints. The results suggest that changes in the planning process have been overwhelming and are seen as restricting the steps required toward making public transport more competitive vis-à-vis the car. So far, local authorities recognize the potential of adding relative competitiveness concerns in the future, as well as the added value of planning support tools capable of revealing such relative competitiveness.

---

Author Biography

Cecília Silva, University of Porto

Faculty of Engineering of the University of Porto
CITTA Research Centre for Territory Transport and Environment

---

References

APSM Maia. (2016). Action plan for sustainable mobility. Maia, Portugal: Maia City Council.

APSM OMA. (2016). Action plan for sustainable mobility. Porto, Portugal: Porto Metropolitan Area.

APSM Santo Tirso. (2016). Action plan for sustainable mobility. Santo Tirso, Portugal: Santo Tirso City Council.

Banister, D. (1994). Reducing the need to travel through planning. The Town Planning Review, 65(4), 349–354.

Banister, D. (2008). The sustainable mobility paradigm. Transport Policy, 15(2), 73–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2007.10.005

Banister, D., Crist, P., & Perkins, S. (2015). Land transport and how to unlock investment in support of “Green Growth” (OECD green growth papers). Paris: OECD.

Benenson, I., Martens, K., Rofé, Y., & Kwartler, A. (2011). Public transport versus private car GIS-based estimation of accessibility applied to the Tel Aviv metropolitan area. The Annals of Regional Science, 47(3), 499–515. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00168-010-0392-6

Bertolini, L. (2007). Evolutionary urban transportation planning: An exploration. Environment and Planning A, 39(8), 1998–2019. https://doi.org/10.1068/a38350

Bertolini, L. (2020). From “streets for traffic” to “streets for people”: Can street experiments transform urban mobility? Transport reviews, 40(6), 734–753. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2020.1761907

Bertolini, L., Le Clercq, F., & Kapoen, L. (2005). Sustainable accessibility: A conceptual framework to integrate transport and land use plan-making. Two test applications in the Netherlands and a reflection on the way forward. Transport Policy, 12(3), 207–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2005.01.006

Buehler, R., & Hamre, A. (2015). The multimodal majority? Driving, walking, cycling, and public transportation use among American adults. Transportation, 42(6), 1081–1101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-014-9556-z

Buehler, R., & Pucher, J. (2011). Making public transport financially sustainable. Transport Policy, 18(1), 126–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2010.07.002

Cavaco, C., Oliveira, A. G., Gusmão, C., Branco, M. C., Nicolau, M., França, L., … Gaspar, R. (2016). Habitat III – Portugal national report. Lisbon, Portugal: General Directorate of the Territory.

Cervero, R. (2013). Linking urban transport and land use in developing countries. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 6(1), 7–24. https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.v6i1.425

Cervero, R. (2014). Transport infrastructure and the environment in the global South: Sustainable mobility and urbanism. Journal of Regional and City Planning, 25(3), 174–191.

Cervero, R., & Kockelman, K. (1997). Travel demand and the 3Ds: Density, diversity, and design. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 2(3), 199–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1361-9209(97)00009-6

Curtis, C., & Scheurer, J. (2010). Planning for sustainable accessibility: Developing tools to aid discussion and decision-making. Progress in Planning, 74(2), 53–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2010.05.001

Curtis, C., & Scheurer, J. (2017). Performance measures for public transport accessibility: Learning from international practice. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 10(1), 93–118. https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2016.683

Davoudi, S., Gunn, Z., Trip, J., Madanipour, A., Megginson, C., Stead, D., Sturzaker, J. (2011). Transforming urban planning policies – Case studies of Oporto, Newcastle, Stockholm and Vienna. SUME-Working Paper 4.3. Newcastle upon Tyne. www.sume.at/project_downloads

Efthymiou, D., Antoniou, C., & Waddell, P. (2013). Factors affecting the adoption of vehicle sharing systems by young drivers. Transport Policy, 29, 64–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2013.04.009

European Commission. (2007). Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2007 on public passenger transport services by rail and by road and repealing Council Regulations (Nos 1191/69 and 1107/70). Brussels: European Commission.

Freudendal-Pedersen, M. (2020). Sustainable urban futures from transportation and planning to networked urban mobilities. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 82, 102310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2020.102310

Halden, D. (2011). The use and abuse of accessibility measures in UK passenger transport planning. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 2, 12–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rtbm.2011.05.001

Hitge, G., & Vanderschuren, M. (2015). Comparison of travel time between private car and public transport in Cape Town. Journal of the South African Institution of Civil Engineering, 57(3), 35–43. https://doi.org/10.17159/2309-8775/2015/v57n3a5

Holden, E., Linnerud, K., Banister, D., Schwanitz, V. J., & Wierling, A. (2017). The imperatives of sustainable development: Needs, justice, limits (pp. 213–226). Abingdon-on-Thames, Oxfordshire, England: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.1647

Ibraeva, A., de Almeida Correia, G. H., Silva, C., & Antunes, A. P. (2020). Transit-oriented development: A review of research achievements and challenges. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 132, 110–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2019.10.018

INE. (2011). National Cencus Data from 2011. Instituto Nacional de Estatística www.ine.pt

IMTT. (2012). National guidelines for mobility. Mobility package — Territory accessibility and mobility management (Territory 63). Lisbon, Portugal: Institute of Mobility and Transportation.

Kenyon, S., & Lyons, G. (2003). The value of integrated multimodal traveler information and its potential contribution to modal change. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behavior, 6(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1369-8478(02)00035-9

Lee, H., Park, H. C., Kho, S. Y., & Kim, D. K. (2019). Assessing transit competitiveness in Seoul considering actual transit travel times based on smart card data. Journal of Transport Geography, 80, 102546. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2019.102546

Levinson, D. (2005). The evolution of transport networks. In Handbook of transport strategy, policy and institutions. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1108/9780080456041-011

Li, L., Bai, Y., Song, Z., Chen, A., & Wu, B. (2018). Public transportation competitiveness analysis based on current passenger loyalty. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 113, 213–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2018.04.016

Litman, T. (2011). The first casualty of a non-existent war evaluating claims of unjustified restrictions on automobile use, and a critique of “Washington’s war on cars and the suburbs.” Victoria Transport Policy Institute. www.vtpi.org/carwars.pdf

Litman, T. (2018). Evaluating public transit benefits and costs. Victoria, BC, Canada: Victoria Transport Policy Institute.

Marquet, O., & Miralles-Guasch, C. (2018). Resilient territories and mobility adaptation strategies in times of economic recession: Evidence from the metropolitan region of Barcelona, Spain 2004–2012. European Urban and Regional Studies, 25(4), 345–359. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969776417703158

Miralles-Guasch, C., Melo, M. M., & Sarda, O. M. (2014). On user perception of private transport in Barcelona Metropolitan area: An experience in an academic suburban space. Journal of Transport Geography, 36, 24–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2014.02.009

Mohino, I., & Ureña, J. M. (2020). Mobility, housing and labor markets in times of economic crises. Regional Studies, 54(4), 443–449. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2020.1711879

MP Maia. (2016, under review). Master plan. Maia, Portugal: Maia City Council.

MP Oporto. (2020, under review). Master plan. Porto, Portugal: Porto Metropolitan Area.

MP Santo Tirso. (2011, under review). Master plan. Santo Tirso, Portugal: Santo Tirso City Council.

MP Viseu. (2013). Master plan. Viseu, Portugal: Viseu City Council.

Næss, P. (2006). Accessibility, activity participation and location of activities: Exploring the links between residential location and travel behavior. Urban Studies, 43(3), 627–652. https://doi.org/10.1080/00420980500534677

Næss, P., Hansson, L., Richardson, T., & Tennøy, A. (2013). Knowledge-based land use and transport planning? Consistency and gap between “state-of-the-art” knowledge and knowledge claims in planning documents in three Scandinavian city regions. Planning Theory & Practice, 14(4), 470–491. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2013.845682

NSSP. (2019). The national strategies for spatial planning. Lisbon, Portugal: Action Program Ministry, National Spatial Planning Policy Program.

Papagiannakis, A., Vitopoulou, A., & Yiannakou, A. (2021). Transit-oriented development in the southern European city of Thessaloniki introducing urban railway: Typology and implementation issues. European Planning Studies, 29(1), 117–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2020.1724267

Pinho, P., Silva, C., Giulietti, F., Reis, J. P., Torres, M., & Naess, P. (2015). MOPUS - Mobility patterns and urban structure. Farnham, UK: Ashgate Publishing.

Poliak, M., Poliakova, A., Mrnikova, M., Šimurková, P., Jaśkiewicz, M., & Jurecki, R. (2017). The competitiveness of public transport. Journal of Competitiveness, 9, 81–97. https://doi.org/10.7441/joc.2017.03.06

PPTC OMA. (2020). Passenger public transport contract. Porto, Portugal: Porto Metropolitan Area.

PPTC Viseu. (2015). Passenger public transport contract. Viseu, Portugal: Viseu City Council. http://www.cm-viseu.pt/assemunicipal/30112015/anexo1.pdf

Proffitt, D. G., Bartholomew, K., Ewing, R., & Miller, H. J. (2019). Accessibility planning in American metropolitan areas: Are we there yet? Urban Studies, 56(1), 167–192. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098017710122

Pucher, J., & Buehler, R. (2017). Cycling toward a more sustainable transport future. Transport Reviews, 37(6), 689–694. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2017.1340234

RFPPT. (2015). Regulatory framework for passenger public transport. Lisbon, Portugal: Assembly of the Republic, Legal Regime of the Public Service for Passenger Transport. https://data.dre.pt/eli/lei/52/2015/06/09/p/dre/pt/html

Sallis, J. F., Cutter, C. L., Lou, D., Spoon, C., Wilson, A. L., Ding, D., … Orleans, C. T. (2014). Active living research. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 46, 195–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2013.10.019

Silva, C., Castro, N., Bicalho, T., & Cadima, C. (2020) Using accessibility measures to reveal public transport competitiveness (Accessibility measures final report for the IPTC project). Porto, Portugal: University of Porto, CITTA. https://citta.fe.up.pt/assets/pdf/projects/2020_final-report_iptc.pdf

Skartland, E. G. (2021). How interventions in master plans affect public transport competitiveness versus cars: A case study of two small and two medium-sized city regions. Urban, Planning and Transport Research. https://doi.org/10.1080/21650020.2020.1862701

SPUD Ave. (2014). The strategic plan for urban development (Final report). Ave, Portugal: Intermunicipal Community of Ave.

SPUD Maia. (2016). The strategic plan for urban development. Maia, Portugal: Maia City Council.

SPUD Viseu. (2015). The strategic plan for urban development. Viseu, Portugal: Viseu City Council.

SUMP Maia. (2011a). Sustainable urban mobility plan. Maia, Portugal: City Council of Maia.

SUMP Maia. (2011b). Sustainable urban mobility plan (Field work schedule report). Maia, Portugal, Maia City Council.

SUMP Maia. (2012). Sustainable urban mobility plan (Characterization and diagnostic report). Maia, Portugal: Maia City Council.

SUMP Maia. (2012). Sustainable urban mobility plan (Scenario and evolution of mobility patterns report). Maia, Portugal: Maia City Council.

SUMP Maia. (2013a). Sustainable urban mobility plan (Characterization and diagnostic report). Maia, Portugal: Maia City Council.

SUMP Maia. (2013b). Sustainable urban mobility plan (Final report). Maia, Portugal: Maia City Council.

SUMP Santo Tirso. (2011a). Sustainable urban mobility plan, volume 1 (Inclusive accessibility study and good practice manual). Santo Tirso, Portugal: Santo Tirso City Council.

SUMP Santo Tirso. (2011b). Sustainable urban mobility plan, volume II (Study of the restructuring of the public road transport network and service). Santo Tirso, Portugal: Santo Tirso City Council.

SUMP Santo Tirso. (2011c). Sustainable urban mobility plan, volume III: The bike path network. Santo Tirso, Portugal: Santo Tirso City Council.

SUMP Santo Tirso. (2011d). Sustainable urban mobility plan, volume IV: Basic program at the door of four schools and pedestrian system. Santo Tirso, Portugal: Santo Tirso City Council.

SUMP Santo Tirso. (2011e). Sustainable urban mobility plan, volume V: Descriptive and justificative memory. Santo Tirso, Portugal: Santo Tirso City Council.

SUMP Santo Tirso. (2016). Sustainable urban mobility plan Volume VI: Hierarchy of the road network, concept of circulation, parking policy. Santo Tirso: Santo Tirso City Council.

Tennøy, A., & Øksenholt, K. V. (2018). The impact of changed structural conditions on regional sustainable mobility planning in Norway. Planning Theory & Practice, 19(1), 93–113. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2017.1408135

Tennøy, A., Hansson, L., Lissandrello, E., & Næss, P. (2016). How planners’ use and non-use of expert knowledge affect the goal achievement potential of plans: Experiences from strategic land-use and transport planning processes in three Scandinavian cities. Progress in Planning, 109, 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2015.05.002

TFL. (2017). Guide to the healthy streets indicators delivering the healthy streets approach about transport for London. London: Transport for London.

Thomas, R., & Bertolini, L. (2017). Defining critical success factors in TOD implementation using rough set analysis. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 10(1), 139–154. https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2015.513

van Lierop, D., & El-Geneidy, A. (2018). Is having a positive image of public transit associated with travel satisfaction and continued transit usage? An exploratory study of bus transit. Public Transport, 10(2), 241–256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12469-018-0175-5