Willingness to pay for demand responsive transport in East Slovakian rural areas

• Autorzy: Gróf Marek , Džupka Peter , Dráb Radovan

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.20858/tp.2023.18.2.12

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The objective of this study was to investigate the feasibility of implementing a demand responsive transport system in the Košice and Prešov regions of East Slovakia. This was achieved through a willingness-to-pay survey conducted in six villages in the target regions. Two separate models were constructed based on the survey results to estimate the residents’ willingness to pay for trips to the nearest major city or the regional capital. The study revealed that the average willingness to pay for trips to the nearest LAU 1 (NUTS 4) administrative center was €0.86 per kilometer, while for trips to NUTS 3 administrative centers, it was €0.38 per kilometer. These findings suggest that demand responsive transport may be more suitable for shorter local journeys than for longer journeys. The study also identified several variables that affect the willingness to pay, such as the frequency and quality of the existing bus transit system and the use of other modes of transport. Additionally, this study highlights the potential benefit of demand responsive transport for residents with mobility impairments or those who travel alone.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

willingness to pay; demand-responsive transport; rural areas transportation; logit model

PL

gotowość do zapłaty; elastyczny transport publiczny; transport wiejski; model logitowy

• Wydawca: Wydawnictwo Politechniki Śląskiej
• Czasopismo: Transport Problems
• Rocznik: 2023
• Tom: T. 18, z. 2
• Strony: 133--145
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 26 poz.

Twórcy

autor

Gróf Marek

• Technical University of Košice; Faculty of Economics; Nemcovej 32, 04001 Košice, Slovakia

• https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8542-8521

autor

Džupka Peter

• Technical University of Košice; Faculty of Economics; Nemcovej 32, 04001 Košice, Slovakia

• https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8947-6555

autor

Dráb Radovan

• Technical University of Košice; Faculty of Economics; Nemcovej 32, 04001 Košice, Slovakia

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6022-5995

Bibliografia

• 1. Litman, T. The New Transportation Planning Paradigm. ITE Journal. 2013. Vol. 83. No. 6. Available at: https://trid.trb.org/view/1256859.
• 2. Donnges, Ch. Improving access in rural areas: guidelines for integrated rural accessibility planning. 2003. ISBN: 978-92-2-113649-1. Available at: http://www.ilo.org/asia/publications/WCMS_BK_PB_216_EN/lang--en/index.htm.
• 3. MDVaRR. Strategický plán rozvoja dopravy SR do roku 2030. Available at: https://www.mindop.sk/ministerstvo-1/doprava-3/strategia/strategicky-plan-rozvoja-dopravy-sr-do-roku-2030.
• 4. Velaga, N.R. & Nelson, J.D. & Wright, S.D. & Farrington, J.H. The potential role of flexible transport services in enhancing rural public transport provision. Journal of Public Transportation. 2012. Vol. 15. No. 1. P. 111-131.
• 5. Wang, C. & Quddus, M. & Enoch, M. & Ryley, T. & Davison, L. Exploring the propensity to travel by demand responsive transport in the rural area of Lincolnshire in England. Case Studies on Transport Policy. 2015. Vol. 3. No. 2. P. 129-136. DOI: 10.1016/j.cstp.2014.12.006.
• 6. Campisi, T. & Basbas, S. & Papanikolaou, A. & Canale, A. & Tesoriere, G. Public transport versus Demand Responsive Transport services in (extremely) low demand areas: the case of the Sicilian Hinterland. In: Nathanail, E.G. & Gavanas, N. & Adamos, G. (eds.). Smart Energy for Smart Transport. Online. Cham. Springer Nature. Switzerland. 2023. P. 1108-1120. Lecture Notes in Intelligent Transportation and Infrastructure. ISBN: 978-3-031-23720-1.
• 7. Papanikolaou, A. & Basbas, S. & Mintsis, G. & Taxiltaris, C. A methodological framework for assessing the success of Demand Responsive Transport (DRT) services. Transportation Research Procedia. 2017. Vol. 24. P. 393-400. DOI: 10.1016/j.trpro.2017. 05.095.
• 8. Arif Khan, M. & Etminani-Ghasrodashti, R. & Kermanshachi, S. & Rosenberger, J.M. & Foss, A. & Hladik, G. Demand-Responsive Transit (DRT) services vs. Fixed Route Transit: an exploratory study of university students. In: International Conference on Transportation and Development. 2022. Seattle, Washington. American Society of Civil Engineers. 31 August 2022. P. 77-87. ISBN: 978-0- 7844-8437-1. DOI: 10.1061/9780784484371.008.
• 9. Ryley, T.J. & Stanley, P.A. & Enoch, M.P. & Zanni, A.M. & Quddus, M.A. Investigating the contribution of Demand Responsive Transport to a sustainable local public transport system. Research in Transportation Economics. 2014. Vol. 48. P. 364-372. DOI: 10.1016/j.retrec.2014.09.064.
• 10. Brake, J.F. & Mulley, C. & Nelson, J.D. Good Practice Guide for Demand Responsive Transport Services using Telematics. 2006. Available at: https://eprints.ncl.ac.uk.
• 11. Laws, R. & Enoch, M. & Ison, S. & Potter, S. Demand responsive transport: a review of schemes in England and Wales. Journal of Public Transportation. 2009. Vol. 12. No. 1. P. 19-37. DOI: 10.5038/2375-0901.12.1.2.
• 12. Quadrifoglio, L.& Li, X. A methodology to derive the critical demand density for designing and operating feeder transit services. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological. 2009. Vol. 43. No. 10. P. 922-935. DOI: 10.1016/j.trb.2009.04.003.
• 13. Viergutz, K. & Schmidt, C. Demand responsive - vs. conventional public transportation: A MATSim study about the rural town of Colditz, Germany. Procedia Computer Science. 2019. Vol. 151. P. 69-76. DOI: 10.1016/j.procs.2019.04.013.
• 14. Mageean, J. & Nelson, J.D. The evaluation of demand responsive transport services in Europe. Journal of Transport Geography. 2003. Vol. 11. No. 4. P. 255-270. DOI: 10.1016/S0966- 6923(03)00026-7.
• 15. Merkert, R. & Beck, M. Value of travel time savings and willingness to pay for regional aviation. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice. 2017. Vol. 96. P. 29-42. DOI: 10.1016/j.tra. 2016.11.022.
• 16. Yang, H. & Ozbay, K. & Bartin, B. & Chien, S.I.-Jy. Evaluation of supplementary traffic control devices for surveyor safety enhancement. Transportation Research Board 92nd Annual Meeting. Washington DC, United States. 2013. Available at: https://rits.rutgers.edu/files/trb2013-4921.pdf
• 17. Eboli, L. & Mazzulla, G. Willingness-to-pay of public transport users for improvement in service quality. European Transport \ Trasporti Europei. 2008. No. 38. P. 107-118.
• 18. Molin, E.J.E. & Timmermans, H.J.P. Traveler expectations and willingness-to-pay for Web-enabled public transport information services. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies. 2006. Vol. 14. No. 2. P. 57-67. DOI: 10.1016/j.trc.2006.05.003.
• 19. Nagadevara, V. & Venkata, R.T. & Roy, S. Quality expectations of transport services and willingness to pay: case of KSRTC. AIMS International Journal of Management. 2007. Vol. 1. P. 40-52.
• 20. Kim, W. & Moon, N. & Kim, J.-W. Fare estimation for demand responsive transport based on a stated preference survey. Transportation Research Procedia. 2017. Vol. 25. P. 5235-5241. DOI: 10.1016/j.trpro.2018.02.050.
• 21. European Commission. Statistical Office of the European Union. Statistical regions in the European Union and partner countries: NUTS and statistical regions 2021 : 2022 edition. LU. 2022.
• 22. Statistical regions in the European Union and partner countries. NUTS and statistical regions 2021: 2022 edition. Available at: https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2785/321792.
• 23. Yan, X. & Zhao, X. & Han, Y. & Van Hentenryck, P. & Dillahunt, T. Mobility-on-demand versus fixed-route transit systems: an evaluation of traveler preferences in low-income communities. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice. 2021. Vol. 148. P. 481-495. DOI: 10.48550/ARXIV.1901.07607.
• 24. Vij, A. & Ryan, S. & Sampson, S. & Harris, S. Consumer preferences for on-demand transport in Australia. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice. 2020. Vol. 132. P. 823-839. DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2019.12.026.
• 25. Chavis, C. & Gayah, V.V. Development of a mode choice model for general purpose flexible-route transit systems. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board. 2017. Vol. 2650. No. 1. P. 133-141. DOI: 10.3141/2650-16.
• 26. Schasché, S.E. & Sposato, R.G. & Hampl, N. The dilemma of demand-responsive transport services in rural areas: Conflicting expectations and weak user acceptance. Transport Policy. 2022. Vol. 126. P. 43-54. DOI: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2022.06.015.