Travel behavior of university students who live on campus: A case study of a rural university in Asia

With their irregular class schedules and considerable freedom in the campus environment, university students are an example of a social group that tends to have complex and unique travel behavior. This study examined travel patterns of 130 students who study and live on campus in a rural university of Thailand. All survey participants completed a travel diary for seven consecutive days in a typical school week. Other than overall travel patterns, such as trip generation, mode split, distance traveled, and travel time, this study also investigated the differences in traffic patterns of four student groups, categorized by their gender and whether they own a private vehicle or not. It was found that students of both genders appeared to have similar travel patterns in all aspects. Whether they own a private vehicle does not appear to impact daily trip generation nor the total distance traveled of the students, but it does have an effect on the travel modes used by students. Those students who own a private vehicle mostly rely on driving the vehicle, while those who do not own a vehicle rely on three modes of travel: primarily being a passenger on or in a friend's private vehicle, and to a lesser extent, driving a friend's vehicle, and taking a bus (the only form of public transport on the campus). The results indicate a high social interdependency among university students, which makes the development of a model to simulate travel behavior of university students a complicated task.

[1]  Rodney Tolley,et al.  Green campuses: cutting the environmental cost of commuting , 1996 .

[2]  Tim Olds,et al.  How do school-day activity patterns differ with age and gender across adolescence? , 2009, The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine.

[3]  Carlos J. L. Balsas,et al.  Sustainable transportation planning on college campuses , 2003 .

[4]  Piet Rietveld,et al.  Is Average Daily Travel Time Expenditure Constant? In Search of Explanations for an Increase in Average Travel Time , 2006 .

[5]  Angie S Page,et al.  Commuting to school: are children who walk more physically active? , 2003, American journal of preventive medicine.

[6]  Karen Villanueva,et al.  Achieving 10,000 steps: a comparison of public transport users and drivers in a university setting. , 2008, Preventive medicine.

[7]  Noreen C McDonald,et al.  Critical factors for active transportation to school among low-income and minority students. Evidence from the 2001 National Household Travel Survey. , 2008, American journal of preventive medicine.

[8]  Søren Underlien Jensen,et al.  How to obtain a healthy journey to school , 2008 .

[9]  Catrine Tudor-Locke,et al.  Comparison of cyclists' and motorists' utilitarian physical activity at an urban university. , 2008, Preventive medicine.

[10]  Scott C. Wearing,et al.  Child transport practices and perceived barriers in active commuting to school , 2008 .

[11]  A. Schäfer,et al.  The future mobility of the world population , 2000 .

[12]  Iragaël Joly,et al.  Travel Time Budget – Decomposition of the Worldwide Mean , 2003 .

[13]  Max Bulsara,et al.  Active commuting in a university setting: Assessing commuting habits and potential for modal change , 2006 .

[14]  Jitendra J. Shah,et al.  Evaluation of Emissions from Asian 2-stroke Motorcycles , 2005 .