Variable message signs (VMS) can provide up‐to‐date traffic information and guidance to drivers through electronic signs at the roadside. The paper draws together the results from VMS field trials conducted in nine cities as part of European Union‐sponsored research projects carried out between 1994 and 1999. The projects followed common guidelines in carrying out field trial evaluations, which has enabled generalized findings to be made on the impacts of the different VMS applications. The main emphasis in the paper is on drivers' reactions to VMS and the impacts of VMS on road network efficiency. Results are reported for four different types of traffic information. For incident messages, it is not only the severity of the problem reported that influences the level of diversions, but also other factors such as the specific location mentioned and the availability of viable alternative routes to avoid the problem location. For route guidance information, it is demonstrated that substantial diversions occur when the route advice differs from that given normally. For continuous information describing the traffic state on a major route, information increases the use of the major route and reduces use of alternative routes if there are no traffic problems reported on the major route. Travel time information was well regarded by drivers and found to be effective in inducing route changes. In general, the deployments of VMS to inform drivers of traffic conditions have proved successful in terms of improving network travel times and reducing environmental impacts. Whilst such changes have been relatively small, driver perception of the benefits is much higher. This is potentially very significant in terms of the role that VMS can play in the development of integrated transport strategies, as the provision of information may encourage greater acceptance of a range of demand management measures.
[1]
Steve Tarry,et al.
THE ROLE OF EVALUATION IN ATT DEVELOPMENT. 3, SYSTEM STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT
,
1995
.
[2]
Piet H. L. Bovy,et al.
Traffic flooding the low countries: How the Dutch cope with motorway congestion
,
1998
.
[3]
Jyk Luk,et al.
ROUTE CHOICE UNDER TWO AUSTRALIAN TRAVEL INFORMATION SYSTEMS
,
1997
.
[4]
Ian Palmer,et al.
ROUTE CHOICE IN RESPONSE TO VARIABLE MESSAGE SIGNS: FACTORS AFFECTING COMPLIANCE. IN: BEHAVIORAL AND NETWORK IMPACTS OF DRIVER INFORMATION SYSTEMS
,
1999
.
[5]
Markos Papageorgiou,et al.
Field Trial Results of VMS Travel Time Display on the Corridor Peripherique of Paris
,
1996
.
[6]
Jonathan Parker,et al.
THE RCOLE OF EVALUATION IN ATT DEVELOPMENT (III).
,
1995
.
[7]
Youngbin Yim,et al.
LINK FLOW EVALUATION USING LOOP DETECTOR DATA: TRAVELER RESPONSE TO VARIABLE-MESSAGE SIGNS
,
1996
.
[8]
Steve Tarry,et al.
THE ROLE OF EVALUATION IN ATT DEVELOPMENT. 4, EVALUATION OF ATT SYSTEMS
,
1995
.
[9]
Steve Tarry,et al.
RESULTS OF PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS OF VARIABLE MESSAGE SIGNS (VMS): A64/A1 ACCIDENT REDUCTION SCHEME AND FORTH ESTUARY DRIVER INFORMATION AND CONTROL SYSTEM (FEDICS)
,
1995
.
[10]
Nick Hounsell,et al.
Driver response to variable message sign information in London
,
2002
.
[11]
Mike McDonald,et al.
URBAN INCIDENT MANAGEMENT USING INTEGRATED CONTROL AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS
,
1996
.
[12]
C Vithen,et al.
RESULTS AND EFFECTS OF VMS CONTROL IN AALBORG
,
1996
.
[13]
P W Bonsall,et al.
DRIVERS' ATTITUDES TO VARIABLE MESSAGE SIGN INFORMATION IN LONDON
,
1997
.