Exploring links between the sustainability performance of urban public transport and land use in international cities





Public transport, transit, sustainability, land use, cities, world review


Sustainability is a major driver of world policy for cities, and public transport is said to be a more sustainable mode of travel than other modes. But how do public transport (PT) systems in different cities compare to each other? This paper measures the relative sustainability of public transport systems between cities rather than between modes within cities. However, its primary focus is to explore the extent to which public transport sustainability is influenced by land use. Do cities with low-density land use automatically have poor sustainability performance? Do high-density megacities always have good sustainability performance relative to other cities? Does land use mean some cities cannot improve sustainability performance? These are some of the questions this research seeks to explore through an empirical study of land use and PT sustainability metrics using correlation/cross sectional and regression analyses. Results suggest that westernized, developed countries (Western Europe, North America, and Oceania) have good environmental and social sustainability performance but poor service effectiveness and economic performance. Asia and Latin America perform the other way around, better on economic and service effectiveness and worse on social and economic performance. Eastern Europe is the one region with higher sustainability performance all around. Prague, Dakar and Tokyo are at the top of 98 cities studied, while Dubai, Shizuoka (Japan), Denver, and Johannesburg perform the worst. Land-use results show that population and job density present the highest correlation with PT sustainability metrics, implying that about a third of overall sustainability performance of public transport in cities might be explained by land use. Higher-density land use improves sustainability performance. A wider range of land-use indicators is more strongly correlated with the service effectiveness categories of sustainability indicators and to less strongly correlated with the economic sustainability indicators, suggesting that Western cities with poor service effectiveness and economic sustainability performance should densify cities to address sustainability challenges. Policy implications and areas for future research are explored.

Author Biography

Graham Currie, Public Transport Research Group, Monash University

Prof Currie is a renowned international Public Transport research leader and policy advisor with over 30 years experience. He has published more research papers in leading international peer research journals in this field than any other researcher in the world. He is founder of the ‘World Transit Research’ clearinghouse (www.worldtransitresearch.info) which has consolidated all research in this field into a single accessible source and is now used by over 8,000 towns and cities in over 170 countries worldwide. Professor Currie has worked for some of the worlds leading Public Transport Operators including London Transport, and he has managed numerous Public Transport research and development projects internationally. Prof Currie’s experience spans Project Management, Demand Forecasting, Planning Methods in Public Transport, Regulatory Reviews, Efficiency and Performance Benchmarking, Training, Market Research, Investment Appraisal and Financial and Economic Analysis. Graham is also a specialist advisor to international agencies on planning transport for special events and has worked on all the summer Olympic Games since 1996 and the Hajj pilgrimage in Mekka. Graham holds one of the worlds first full Professorships specializing in Public Transport. In this role he aims to develop knowledge and training for the public transport profession on a national and international basis.


Brundtland Commission. (1987). Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our common future. New York: United Nations.

Castillo, H., & Pitfield, D. (2010). ELASTIC—A methodological framework for identifying and selecting sustainable transport indicators. Transportation Research Part D, 15, 179–188.

Cervero, R. (2013). Linking urban transport and land use in developing countries. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 6(1), 7–24.

De Gruyter, C., Currie, G., & Rose, G. (2017). Sustainability measures of public transport in cities: A world review and focus on the Asia/Middle East region. Sustainability, 9(1), 43.

Demographia. (2016). Demographia world urban areas, 12th annual edition. Belleview, IL: Demographia.

Dobranskyte-Niskota, A., Perujo, A., & Pregl, A. (2007). Indicators to assess sustainability of transport activities, Part 1: Review of the existing transport sustainability indicators initiatives and development of an indicator set to assess transport sustainability performance. Ispra, Italy: European Commission, DG Joint Research Center Institute for Environment and Sustainability.

Ewing, R., & Cervero, R. (2010). Travel and the built environment: A meta-analysis. Journal of the American Planning Association, 76(3), 265–294.

Geerlings, H., & Stead, D. (2003). The integration of land use planning, transport and environment in European policy and research. Transport Policy, 10(3), 187–196.

Griggs, D., Stafford-Smith, M., Gaffney, O., Rockström, J., Öhman, M., Shyamsundar, P., Steffen, W., Glaser, G., Kanie, N., & Noble, I. (2013). Sustainable development goals for people and planet. Nature, 495(7441), 305–307.

Haghshenas, H., & Vaziri, M. (2012). Urban sustainable transportation indicators for global comparison. Ecological Indicators, 15, 115–121.

Jeon, C. M., Amekudzi, A., & Guensler, R. L. (2010). Evaluating plan alternatives for transportation system sustainability: Atlanta Metropolitan Region. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 4(4), 227–247.

Kenworthy, J. R., & Laube, F. B. (1999). Patterns of automobile dependence in cities: An international overview of key physical and economic dimensions with some implications for urban policy. Transportation Research Part A, 33, 691–723.

Litman, T. (2009). Sustainable transportation indicators: A recommended research program for developing sustainable transportation indicators and data. Paper presented at the 88th Transportation Research Board (TRB) Annual Meeting, Washington, DC.

Litman, T. (2016). Land use impacts on transport: How land-use factors affect travel behavior. Victoria, BC: Victoria Transport Policy Institute (VTPI).

Miller, P. (2014). Sustainability and public transportation: Theory and analysis (doctoral dissertation). Calgary, Manitoba: University of Calgary.

Miller, P., de Barros, A. G., Kattan, L., & Wirasinghe, S. C. (2016). Analyzing the sustainability performance of public transit. Transportation Research Part D, 44, 177–198.

Newman, P., & Kenworthy, J. R. (2006). Urban design to reduce automobile dependence. Opolis: An International Journal of Suburban and Metropolitan Studies, 2(1), 35–52.

OECD. (2016). OECD Metropolitan eXplorer. Retrieved from http://measuringurban.oecd.org/

Schwarz, N. (2010). Urban form revisited—selecting indicators for characterizing European cities. Landscape and Urban Planning, 96, 29–47.

The Brookings Institution. (2016). Global metro monitor 2014: An uncertain recovery. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.

UITP. (2001). Millenium cities database for sustainable mobility. Brussels: International Association of Public Transport.

UITP. (2015). Mobility in cities database 2015. Brussels: International Association of Public Transport.

United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development. New York: United Nations.

Vuchic, V. (1999). Transportation for livable cities. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers, State University of New Jersey, Center for Urban Policy Research.




How to Cite

Currie, G., & De Gruyter, C. (2018). Exploring links between the sustainability performance of urban public transport and land use in international cities. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2018.957