Milena Scherer

Is Light Rail More Attractive to Users Than Bus Transit? Arguments Based on Cognition and Rational Choice

Decision making for a new light rail system is based on a demand forecast and the additional benefits expected to come along with rail transit. Recent light rail implementations have shown that the demand forecast was often inaccurate. The supposition is that the attraction of light rail, compared with bus systems, has been misjudged. This paper presents arguments on this bias based on a literature review of cognitive approaches and rational choices, with a focus on Europe and North America. The higher attraction of light rail for users is most likely because of four impact groups. The first of these is the attention-capturing factors, such as new and modern vehicles, special design, visibility of route (e.g., tracks, bus lanes), and media presence during the evaluation and construction process; these factors contribute to the memory representation and perception of transit systems. The second is the perceived attributes of transit systems, especially qualitative factors of reliability and ride comfort, which are highly associated with light rail systems. The third, neighborhood characteristics of areas served with a specific transit mode, were found to contribute to the perception and valuation of this transit mode. And last, following the theory of induced demand, the higher capacity provided by light rail vehicles compared with buses can affect ridership. It was found that cognitive approaches contributed to the explanation of the potential preference for light rail. These approaches help to clarify why demand is expected to differ, especially in situations in which light rail and buses provide similar service characteristics in regard to availability.

Constructing Time‐Scaled Maps: Switzerland from 1950 to 2000†

Abstract The article discusses the construction of a time‐scaled maps series for Switzerland documenting the shrinking of the country since 1950. It describes underlying network models and the mathematical approach employed for the necessary rescaling. In conclusion, it presents the maps and discusses how the country was shrunk by half. † The article is based on earlier German‐language papers documenting this work by Carosio et al. (2005) and Fröhlich et al. (2005).

Alternatives to automated people‐mover systems for small but dense populated areas

Abstract This paper describes the operational and technical requirements for a high quality public transport system in the country of Liechtenstein and is based on a study conducted by the Institute for Transport Planning and Systems (IVT) at the ETH Zurich. In this case study, a new public transport system (NPT) is defined as a new guideway transport system introduced in a region where this system does not exist yet. Often there are forms of a new technology, for instance, an automated people mover or a modern tramway. Some of the surveyed NPTs are not introduced in many places. The Liechtenstein case study made it possible to analyze, why these systems have not been successful than expected and what is the most appropriate way to introduce a NPT in this country.

Differences in Travel Behavior and Demand Potential of Tram- and Bus-Based Neighborhoods: Evidence from a Cluster Analysis

One of the most contentious issues in public transport planning is whether passengers react differently to rail-based public transport and to bus-based public transport. A key problem is the difficulty in comparing the two modes. Specifically, rail-based modes are often built in higher-density environments that have higher latent public transport demand. Bus routes rarely offer the same service qualities (travel speed, service frequency) as rail service does. An approach that uses cluster analysis of public transport services as a basis for further comparison can account for these evaluated methodological shortcomings. This approach provides the opportunity to compare bus and rail under similar conditions. The authors describe the cluster analysis in which bus and rail transport in Zurich and Berne, Switzerland, were compared. The research considered several public transport qualities regarding travel time, frequency, and number of lines between bus and tram service to a particular stop. Where equivalent service qualities were provided, no significant higher effect existed in tram-based clusters compared with bus-based clusters. Nevertheless, demand potential (defined as numbers of residents and jobs) differed between clusters.

More Comfort, Shorter Travel Time, or Low Fares?

This paper, by controlling for other covariants, examines how the needs and preferences of transit users for more comfort, shorter travel times, or low fares vary across different trip purposes, such as education, work, holiday, leisure, business, and shopping. The fieldwork for this research effort was undertaken in central Switzerland on a scenic railway route. The logit modeling approach shows the following preliminary findings: Shorter travel times are most preferred by business travelers, followed by those traveling for educational and work purposes. Leisure and holiday travelers are more sensitive to low fares than to comfort. There is a strong age effect; for leisure travel elderly people tend to prefer comfort more than a low fare. Transport decision makers could balance system needs with customer expectations and incorporate these factors into transport and marketing planning.

Mobilitätsplan Hochschulgebiet Zürich

Die folgenden Abbildungen und Dokumente sind wahrend den Arbeiten am Mobilitatsplan Hochschulgebiet am IVT entstanden oder wurden fur die Arbeiten aus verschiedenen Quellen zusammengetragen. Sie bieten gegenuber dem Hauptbericht zusatzliche Informationen, sind aber fur das Verstandnis des Hauptberichts nicht erforderlich.

Mobilitätsplan Hochschulgebiet Zürich: Dokumente zu den Kapiteln 1, 2 und 4

Die folgenden Abbildungen und Dokumente sind wahrend den Arbeiten am Mobilitatsplan Hochschulgebiet am IVT entstanden oder wurden fur die Arbeiten aus verschiedenen Quellen zusammengetragen. Sie bieten gegenuber dem Hauptbericht zusatzliche Informationen, sind aber fur das Verstandnis des Hauptberichts nicht erforderlich.