Valuation of a transfer in a multimodal public transport trip : a stated preference research into the experienced disutility of a transfer between bus/tram/metro and train within the Netherlands

A web-based stated preference (SP) experiment is carried out to determine the transfer disutility of a transfer between bus/tram/metro (BTM) and train. The choice situations were described by the attributes BTM trip time, transfer time, in-train time, headway of the connecting mode, costs and station facilities. The experiment included choice situations between two BTM-train alternatives and choice situations between a BTM-train alternative and a train-train alternative. Based on the comparison of a BTM-train transfer with a train-train transfer, the BTM-train transfer disutility is estimated. Respondents are recruited from the NS panel (N = 1064). To increase the realism of the experiment, the values for the BTM trip time, in-train time and costs were adaptive to the real values of a recent BTM-train trip as reported by the respondent. A general mixed logit error component model is estimated. Furthermore, sub models based on trip motive, travel frequency and trip stage are estimated. The estimation results offer information on the trade-off between the different attributes of a multimodal trip. The estimated parameters are within a reasonable range, compared with findings from literature. A transfer between BTM and train with a transfer time of 8 minutes and a headway of the connecting mode of 15 minutes results in a transfer disutility of 29 minutes generalized travel time (GTT). The transfer disutility is highly dependent on transfer time and the headway of the connecting mode. Changing the transfer time from 8 minutes to 15 minutes increases the total transfer disutility to 39 – 51 minutes GTT. An increase of the headway of the connecting mode from 15 minutes to 30 minutes increases the GTT with 7 to 13 minutes. Only for recreational travelers an effect is found on station facilities. These travelers perceive a very large station positive with a value of 4 minutes GTT, compared to a medium or large station. The egress time by bus is valued with a factor 1.4 compared to a minute in-train time. The access time by bus and the access/egress time by tram/metro are not found to be significantly different from in-train time. Values of time are estimated for different trip motives and incomes. The obtained values are in accordance with other value of time studies. In general, the most optimal transfer time is found to be 8 minutes, but differences are found between respondents and stations. High-frequent travelers prefer a transfer time of 6 minutes, while low-frequent travelers prefer a transfer time of 9 minutes. The resulting values from this research can be used by NS to extend their route assignment model (for train trips) to BTM trips as well. Furthermore, insights into the preferences of different groups of travelers are provided. If the majority of travelers on a certain transfer have the same trip motive or travel frequency (for example work/business travelers during the morning peak hours), the transfer times can be adjusted to these types of travelers.

[1]  Serge P. Hoogendoorn,et al.  Modeling Transfers in Multimodal Trips: Explaining Correlations , 2005 .

[2]  Barbara McPake,et al.  How to do (or not to do) ... Designing a discrete choice experiment for application in a low-income country. , 2009, Health policy and planning.

[3]  Philip Hans Franses,et al.  Combining Revealed and Stated Preferences to Forecast Customer Behaviour: Three Case Studies , 2002 .

[4]  Hiroyuki Iseki,et al.  Style versus Service? An Analysis of User Perceptions of Transit Stops and Stations in Los Angeles , 2010 .

[5]  P. Rietveld,et al.  Coping with unreliability in public transport chains: a case study for The Netherlands , 2001 .

[6]  Juan de Dios Ortúzar,et al.  Subjective valuation of the transit transfer experience: The case of Santiago de Chile , 2013 .

[7]  R. Sheldon,et al.  STATED PREFERENCE METHODS. AN INTRODUCTION , 1988 .

[8]  Marco Kouwenhoven,et al.  New Insights in Resistance to Interchange , 2014 .

[9]  Iqbal Hamiduddin,et al.  S-MAP 2030: An action plan for seamless mobility in North West Europe , 2013 .

[10]  Esther Seiden,et al.  On Orthogonal Arrays , 1966 .

[11]  Joel Huber,et al.  The Importance of Utility Balance in Efficient Choice Designs , 1996 .

[12]  Mark Wardman,et al.  INTERCHANGE AND TRAVEL CHOICE VOLUME 2 , 2001 .

[13]  Jan Francke Kennisinstituut voor Mobiliteitsbeleid , 2010 .

[14]  Marcus van Hagen Waiting experience at train stations , 2011 .

[15]  Deborah Marshall,et al.  Constructing experimental designs for discrete-choice experiments: report of the ISPOR Conjoint Analysis Experimental Design Good Research Practices Task Force. , 2013, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[16]  Andreas Kontoleon,et al.  Assessing the impacts of alternative 'Opt-out' formats in choice experiment studies: Consumer preferences for genetically modified content and production information in food , 2003 .

[17]  David A. Hensher,et al.  Development of Commuter and Non-Commuter Mode Choice Models for the Assessment of New Public Transport Infrastructure Projects: A Case Study , 2007 .

[18]  Peter Nijkamp,et al.  Analysis of travellers' satisfaction with transport chains , 2000 .

[19]  Marco Kouwenhoven,et al.  De maatschappelijke waarde van kortere en betrouwbaardere reistijden , 2013 .

[20]  K. Train Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation , 2003 .

[21]  Julian Hine,et al.  INTERCHANGE AND TRAVEL CHOICE - VOLUMES 1 AND 2 , 2001 .

[22]  P. Zarembka Frontiers in econometrics , 1973 .

[23]  Zhan Guo,et al.  Assessment of the transfer penalty to transit trips in Downtown Boston : a GIS-based disaggregate modeling approach , 2003 .

[24]  Joffre Swait,et al.  Using stated preference and revealed preference modeling to evaluate prescribing decisions. , 2004, Health economics.

[25]  T. Arentze,et al.  Travelers’ Preferences in Multimodal Networks: Design and Results of a Comprehensive Series of Choice Experiments , 2013 .

[26]  Armando Cartenì,et al.  The hedonic value of railways terminals. A quantitative analysis of the impact of stations quality on travellers behaviour , 2014 .

[27]  Mark Wardman,et al.  Costs of Interchange: A Review of the Literature. , 2000 .

[28]  Karst Teunis Geurs,et al.  Interchanges in timetable design of railways: A closer look at customer resistance to interchange between trains , 2012 .

[29]  Przemyslaw Borkowski,et al.  Types of solutions improving passenger transport interconnectivity , 2012 .

[30]  K. Train Halton Sequences for Mixed Logit , 2000 .

[31]  Vukan R Vuchic,et al.  Urban Transit : Operations, Planning and Economics , 2005 .

[32]  Karst Teunis Geurs,et al.  Adaptive stated choice experiment for access and egress mode choice to train stations , 2014 .

[33]  D Palmer,et al.  Door to Door Journeys , 2011 .

[34]  J. Preston,et al.  The demand for public transport: a practical guide , 2004 .

[35]  Julian Hine,et al.  SEAMLESS, ACCESSIBLE TRAVEL: USERS' VIEWS OF THE PUBLIC TRANSPORT JOURNEY AND INTERCHANGE , 2000 .

[36]  K. Rehrl,et al.  Assisting orientation and guidance for multimodal travelers in situations of modal change , 2005, Proceedings. 2005 IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2005..

[37]  N. Sanko Guidelines for Stated Preference Experiment Design , 2001 .

[38]  M. Wardman A REVIEW OF BRITISH EVIDENCE ON TIME AND SERVICE QUALITY VALUATIONS , 2001 .

[39]  Mark Wardman,et al.  Interchange and seamless travel , 2003 .

[40]  D. McFadden Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior , 1972 .

[41]  Alan J Horowitz,et al.  EVALUATION OF INTERMODAL PASSENGER TRANSFER FACILITIES , 1994 .

[42]  Mark Wardman,et al.  Public transport values of time , 2004 .

[43]  M Wardman,et al.  THE DESIGN OF STATED PREFERENCE TRAVEL CHOICE EXPERIMENTS. WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO INTERPERSONAL TASTE VARIATIONS , 1988 .

[44]  M. Ben-Akiva,et al.  A THEORETICAL AND EMPIRICAL MODEL OF TRIP CHAINING BEHAVIOR , 1979 .

[45]  Zhan Guo,et al.  Assessing the cost of transfer inconvenience in public transport systems: A case study of the London Underground , 2011 .

[46]  Mark Wardman,et al.  A COMPARISON OF REVEALED PREFERENCE AND STATED PREFERENCE MODELS OF TRAVEL BEHAVIOUR , 1988 .

[47]  Ta Theo Arentze,et al.  Multimodal public transport: an analysis of travel time elements and the interconnectivity ratio , 2004 .

[48]  Hiroyuki Iseki,et al.  Not All Transfers Are Created Equal: Towards a Framework Relating Transfer Connectivity to Travel Behaviour , 2009 .

[49]  Michel Bierlaire,et al.  BIOGEME: a free package for the estimation of discrete choice models , 2003 .

[50]  Mark Wardman,et al.  Meta-analysis of UK values of travel time: An update , 2011 .

[51]  Mark Wardman,et al.  The effects of station enhancements on rail demand , 2008 .

[52]  D. Hensher,et al.  Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Applications , 2000 .

[53]  Thérèse Steenberghen,et al.  Space and time related determinants of public transport use in trip chains , 2006 .