Abstract
The purpose of this article is to investigate Kazan inhabitants' reactions to the idea of not utilizing a personal automobile as a mode of mobility in the city. On the basis of the research and assessment, the goal of this study is to provide recommendations to promote the notion of Kazan city residents utilizing public transportation services. The following key tasks were established and solved in order to reach the goal: a theoretical and empirical explanation of the major concepts related to the study's subject; a comparison of the volume of public expenditures incurred by Kazan citizens when driving their own automobile vs using public transportation services was conducted, and the city of Kazan's public transportation system was assessed. A questionnaire survey and content analysis were used as part of the study's methodology. As a result of the research, we discovered that there is now a problem in Kazan, namely, the inability to provide a universal transfer of residents from the use of private automobiles to the use of public transportation services owing to a lack of development of the appropriate infrastructure. The main recommendation for local authorities is to implement a policy to modernize the transport fund and improve transportation routes in conjunction with the gradual introduction of restrictive measures for motorists.
Keywords: public transportation, personal transportation, quality of transportation services, means of individual mobility, greening
Introduction
In the fall of 2020, the Ministry of Transport of the Russian Federation released an updated draft of the Transport Strategy, according to which the Russian government is considering a possible transition to free public transport in cities by 2035. Ministry of Transport of the Russian Federation proposes to introduce free travel on public transport provided the mechanism of «the user pays» for all categories of motorists. This scheme provides that in 2025 toll will be collected on roads of regional importance, and by 2035 - from «all categories of road users», including the road network of urban agglomerations. According to this draft document, such a mechanism is needed to stimulate the use of public transport and reduce the use of private transport in large cities.
But so far, public transportation has been less popular with Russian residents than personal transportation, according to a report on the implementation of the current transportation strategy, which was adopted in 2013. In 2019, the tendency of passengers leaving public transport continued, «despite the growing attractiveness of urban passenger transport systems and taxi and carsharing services» (Ding et al., 2019; Jochem et al., 2020; M. de-Miguel-Molina et al., 2020; Čulík et al., 2020), due to dramatically improved road conditions, especially in the European part of the country, which allowed the use of personal cars, both for business trips and for tourism.
Of course, after the acquisition of a personal vehicle, a new owner faces a significant number of problems, difficulties and inherent financial investments: the need for various types of insurance, the possibility of periodic getting into traffic jams, congestion and accidents, the need to change the summer tires for winter and back, the constant need to buy fuel, the need to check the technical condition and the usual routine maintenance, the obligation to registrar of the vehicle, the need to pay for the necessary technical condition of the vehicle, and the need for the maintenance of the vehicle. In addition, it has been scientifically proven that cars have a negative impact on the environment, and therefore on public health indicators. On the other hand, the use of a private car - a mobile alternative to public transport - is the possibility of free movement and the feeling of comfort of private space not only at home, but also in the vehicle.
To find out the prospects of plans to implement mechanisms to economically stimulate the influx of the population into public transport, it is important to conduct research on the attitude of residents of large Russian cities to the possibility of abandoning the use of private cars as the main means of transportation in their municipalities (Urbanek, 2021; Andersson et al., 2020; Bayart et al., 2020; Gundlach et al., 2018).
Problem Statement
The problematics of the study can be defined as follows. The high public and personal costs associated with the maintenance of personal transport, as well as the interest of city authorities in reducing the number of vehicles within the city limits require the consideration of the readiness of the population to partially abandon the possession of a personal car. However, the absence of a worthy alternative in the form of public transportation makes such abandonment virtually impossible (Tiwari & Phillip, 2021; Uskov & Kharchenko, 2021; Rudke et al., 2021).
Research Questions
The general population in this study is the population of the city of Kazan.
The sample of this study includes 200 male and female residents of the city of Kazan, aged 16 to 71 years. When determining the probability group of the sample population, we used solid sampling. When conducting the survey, we will use the «snowball» method (person-to-person).
The following basic concepts were clarified and interpreted as part of the study:
1) The idea of refusal of the personal car - the concept, the essence of which consists in the complete/partial refusal of city residents to choose as a means of transportation in the territory of the municipality a personal car by resorting to the services of local public transport (Andersson, 2020);
2) The cost of using a private car - the costs of the consumer associated with the use of a personal vehicle, arising in the process of meeting the needs (in the movement) (Yen et al., 2020);
3) The cost of recourse to public transport services - the costs of the consumer associated with the use of public transport services, arising in the process of meeting the needs (in the movement) (Pavón & Rizzi, 2019);
4) Quality of transportation services - a set of properties and indicators of the transportation process and transportation system that determine their compliance with regulatory requirements and the ability to meet certain needs of residents in accordance with the purpose of services (Sinha et al., 2020);
5) Personal car - a car (most often a car, but it can also be an SUV, pickup or minibus), in which the driver goes on his own business. Such a car may be owned by the driver or may be rented (Saleem et al., 2018);
6) Owner of a private vehicle - the owner of the vehicle, as well as the person who owns the vehicle on the right of economic management or the right of operational management or on another legal basis (right of lease, power of attorney to manage the vehicle, the order of the relevant authority to transfer the vehicle to that person, and the like).
7) Public transport - a type of passenger transport as a sector that provides services for the transportation of people on the routes, which the carrier establishes in advance, bringing to the public the method of delivery (vehicle), the size and form of payment, guaranteeing regularity (repeatability of movement at the end of the production cycle of transportation), as well as the immutability of the route at the request of passengers (Stryhul et al., 2021; Suguiy et al., 2020);
8) Transport infrastructure - a set of all branches and enterprises of transport, both performing transportation and providing their performance and maintenance, which includes a street and road network; off-street transport network (surface, overhead and underground); facilities for maintenance of transport facilities (parks and depots for parking, repair and maintenance of rolling stock, cargo terminals or stations, power facilities, railway stations) (Tonn et al., 2021);
9) Economic efficiency is an indicator defined by the ratio of the economic effect (result) and the costs that generated this effect (result) (Sun & Cui, 2018);
10) Social efficiency is the conformity of the results of economic activity to the basic social needs and goals of society, the interests of an individual person (Sun & Cui, 2018);
11) Transport service schedule is a document establishing the time and (or) intervals of arrival of the rolling stock of off-street transport to the stations of off-street transport and (or) departure of the rolling stock of off-street transport from the stations of off-street transport (Giuffrida et al., 2021);
12) Carrier – a legal entity or individual entrepreneur who, under the contract of passenger transportation, has assumed the obligation to carry the passenger and carry the hand luggage by off-street transportation (Weckström & Mladenović, 2020).
Purpose of the Study
On the basis of the research and assessment, the goal of this study is to provide recommendations to promote the notion of Kazan city residents utilizing public transportation services. The following are the major tasks that must be completed in order to reach the goal:
- a survey on the refusal of a personal car as a means of transport in the city among the residents of Kazan;
- developing recommendations on the elimination of the reasons that may make city residents want to own and use a personal car for their movements.
Research Methods
The methodological tools of the study consisted of:
1) Questionnaire survey – this method of collecting information allows you to find out the opinion about the organization of urban transport infrastructure in a wide range of the population.
2) Content analysis which is a special, rather strict and formalized method of qualitative-quantitative analysis of various materials (documents, articles, etc.).
Applied methodological tools.
Empirical data in the study will be collected using:
1) a questionnaire;
2) information materials for content analysis.
Findings
Conducting a survey on the rejection of personal cars as a means of transport in the city among residents of Kazan, we were able to get answers from 200 respondents. To begin with, we will conduct a detailed analysis of the received answers to each question of the questionnaire separately.
The target audience of our survey is represented by people of different age groups.
The majority of respondents belonged to the 16-23 age group (43.5% of the total number), followed by the 36-55 age group (29.5% of the total number), then 24-35 (22.5% of the total number). Also, a small number of answers was received from representatives of the age group 56-70 (4.5% of the total number). Unfortunately, representatives of the age group 71 and over did not participate in our survey. Thus, representatives of different age groups participated in our survey, but young and middle-aged people prevailed.
In the first question, we tried to find out if the respondents have a personal car or if they are considering buying one in the next few years. According to the results of the survey, the answers to this question were distributed as follows:
Of the total number of respondents, 31.5% have a personal car; 32.5% do not have a personal car but intend to purchase one in the next few years; 24% do not have a personal car but do not rule out the possibility of purchasing one in the future, and only 12% do not have a personal car and will not purchase one. Since only 24 people out of 200 surveyed do not have a personal car and do not intend to purchase one, for the vast majority a personal car is a necessary attribute for living in the city. This means that, at this point, people are not at all ready for the idea of living in the city without a personal car. In implementing the results of the survey, the most difficult work should be done with those who chose the first or second answer (64% of the total number). In order for these categories of citizens to refuse to use or buy a private car, it is necessary to provide them with an alternative that is better in all aspects. People who chose the third option (24% of the total number) can be categorized as «undecided». With them the task is a little easier - it is necessary to give them a way to move around the city, making it fast, convenient, comfortable and inexpensive. And then these people will not buy a personal car in the future. The most loyal to our idea category is only 12% of the total number of respondents. According to the results of the answers, it is possible to reveal not very favorable tendencies for the idea of giving up a personal car and switching to moving around the city only by public transport.
In the second question, we tried to find out under what conditions people would refuse to use a personal car or to buy one. It was a multiple-choice question. According to the results of the survey, the answers to this question were distributed as follows (Fig. 01).
From the data presented above (Fig. 01), it can be noted that people who will not use a car under any conditions are only 7.5% of the total number. This is the most loyal category of respondents, as they do not need any action from the outside to refuse to move around the city in a personal car. It can also be noted from the answers that financial measures of influence on the use of a personal car (increase in prices for cars, increase in prices for car maintenance, increase in transport tax) in general are not very popular among respondents and, therefore, are not good reasons for refusal to use a personal car. In other words, there is a great risk of not transferring people en masse to public transport and not increasing its popularity, affecting the price component from the use of a personal car. Thus, the measures mentioned above are currently ineffective. The majority of respondents (52% of the total) want to own any car under any circumstances. With this category of people, we will have to work most actively in the process of implementation of the idea of refusal to use a personal car in the city, as it will be difficult to change their minds. But the situation is not so bad, because 39.5% of the total number of respondents are ready to refuse using a personal car or buying one when fast and convenient alternative ways of moving around the city are created. This category of people should be emphasized, as they are relatively loyal to the idea of not using a personal car in the city; they just need to get the opportunity to use alternative ways of getting around the city. These results are not very optimistic, but they give real hope for the realization of the idea of not using a personal car when creating alternative means of transportation in the city.
In the third question, we tried to find out how the respondents estimated the intensity of their commute in the city (Fig. 02).
The number of people who chose the first and the second answers is 35,5%. This category of people moves around the city a lot or a lot per day (for various reasons: personal, work, family, forced), so it is hardly possible to transfer them to public transport and disincline them from using a personal car. However, the remaining people who chose the third, fourth and fifth answer options (64.5% of the total number), whose movements around the city are not so frequent, it is quite possible to disincline them from using a personal car and transfer them only to public transport or other means of individual mobility on a permanent basis. These results are quite positive; the information obtained from the answers confirms the possibility of people to refuse to use a personal car.
In the fourth question, we asked how often Kazan residents use public transportation to get around the city.
The number of people who use public transportation often (43%) or very often (6.5%) is 49.5% of the total number of respondents. These results are very positive, because at the moment public transport is really in demand and relevant for daily travel for almost half of the total number of respondents. And it is likely that this category is already ready to give up using private transport or intend to buy it in the future if the current state of infrastructure and travel routes is maintained. People who chose the third option «Sometimes (once every few days)» (25.5%) represent the category of «undecided». It is most likely that they choose between the possibility of moving by public transport and a private car. Since they are not categorical about moving by public transport, it is necessary to carry out work aimed at ensuring that they choose it for their movements all the time. The most «dangerous» category for us are the people who chose the fourth option - «Rarely (once every few weeks)» and the fifth option - «Never» response (25% of the total number). This category very rarely or not at all uses public transportation. There are quite a few of them (a quarter of the total number of respondents), so this point cannot be ignored. Before disinclining them from using a private car, it is necessary to find out the reasons why they do not use public transport at the moment. And, based on this, to take appropriate measures (it may be necessary to create new routes of public transport). Also, based on the results of the answers to this question, it can be concluded that public transport in Kazan is now quite relevant and in demand among the population.
In the fifth question, we found out what means of mobility in addition to a personal car and public transport (bus, trolley bus, streetcar, metro) are used by Kazan citizens to move around the city. According to the results of the survey, answers to this question were distributed as follows: 179 (89.5%) –taxis, 21 (10.5%) – bicycles, scooters - 4 (2%), other personal means of mobility - 21 (10.5%).
We can conclude that the most popular among respondents is taxi (179 people out of 200 respondents have chosen this answer). It is worth noting that, despite existing misconceptions, taxis belong to public transport. Taxis are capable of carrying several passengers; in addition, they can drive in a dedicated lane on the roads. The fact that taxis are actively used is quite positive, as it demonstrates that almost all respondents use and are willing to use taxis for some travel. Certainly, the use of taxis is more positive for the city than the use of a private car. Also, based on the answers, we can observe that such means of transportation as bicycle, scooter, other means of personal mobility (rollers, skateboards, gyro scooters, segways, mono wheels, etc.) are not popular among citizens of Kazan. There can be several reasons for this: lack of environment and infrastructure for movement and use of these means of transportation; peculiarities of public consciousness, in which these means of transportation are perceived either as seasonal or as recreational. Measures must be taken to combat these causes. First of all, it is necessary to create conditions for the use of these means of transportation - to build more pedestrian zones and bicycle lanes in the city; to increase the number of available rental outlets for these means of transportation; to pose to society the idea of active use of these means of transportation.
In the sixth question, we tried to find out what kind of transport, except a personal car, Kazan citizens use most often.
It can be noted that at the moment the most popular among Kazan citizens are buses, metro and taxis (105, 125 and 105 votes out of 200, respectively). Kazan residents are quite satisfied with the listed modes of public transport, and they quite often choose these modes for their movements around the city. However, the answers «trolleybus» and «streetcar» did not receive so many votes (38 and 27 respectively), based on which we can conclude that these means of public transport should be developed, new routes should be launched, the number of rolling stocks on current routes should be increased.
In the seventh question, we evaluated the satisfaction of the population of the city of Kazan with the current state of urban public transport in terms of various criteria (Table 01).
First of all, it is worth noting that within each criterion, there are more respondents who are satisfied or rather satisfied with public transport than respondents who are rather dissatisfied or dissatisfied with it. For the first 5 criteria for assessing the condition of public transport in Kazan, respondents indicated that they were rather satisfied with the comfort of travel, speed of travel, fare, the condition of transport and professionalism of conductors and drivers. For the criterion of accessibility of use, most respondents indicated a rating of «satisfied», and then by the number of voters is followed by the evaluation of the criterion «rather satisfied».
In the eighth question, we tried to find out the opinion of Kazan citizens about their willingness to use only public transport to move around the city.
In general, respondents gave preference to two answers. On the one hand, 90 people (45% of respondents) answered that they are ready to use only public transport, but they will also use taxis. On the other hand, 88 people (44%) responded that they would only use a private car for all movements around the city. The remaining three answer choices combined accounted for only 22 people. 14 respondents (7%) indicated that they would be willing to use public transportation, but they would also rent bikes/scooters and order taxis. Another 6 people (3%) responded that public transportation meets all of their needs, and only two people (1%) indicated that they were willing to use only public transportation, but would not rule out using scooters/bicycles to get around town. As a result, the survey for this question resulted in a rather contradictory situation, with one half of respondents willing to completely switch to public transportation and taxis, and the other half willing to use only a personal car if available.
In the ninth question, we sought to find out what would increase the attractiveness of public transport (bus, trolleybus, streetcar, metro) in the eyes of respondents and contribute to its choice to move around the city (it was a multiple-choice question) (Fig. 03).
In general, respondents chose different factors and sides of the development of public transport in the survey. For the majority of respondents, the price of a trip and the number of routes were most important when switching to public transportation altogether.
In the tenth question, we tried to find out what measures aimed at reducing personal car use the city authorities should take.
The majority of respondents chose two answers out of six: 121 people (60.5%) responded that authorities should create convenient and fast alternative ways to get around, and 95 people (47.5%) responded that authorities do not need to influence personal car use. An equal number of respondents - 23 (11,5%) - chose the following answers - to introduce paid parking in the center of the city and to introduce paid parking everywhere. Such measure as a large tax on personal cars was chosen by 17 people (8.5%). And narrowing of the roads and decrease in the number of lanes was chosen by 11 people (5.5%). As a result, a contradiction arose again within the framework of this question. On the one hand, people think that the authorities should influence the reduction of personal car use by creating alternatives. On the other hand, quite a few respondents also said that the authorities do not need to reduce the use of the private car.
In question 11, we decided to identify the main expectations of the citizens of the possible decrease in the use of private cars by motorists and the transition of the majority of the population to public transport. It is worth noting that the respondent could choose several answer options, which means that the statements that scored a low percentage of votes appear to be wrong to most respondents.
The following statements were presented to respondents for analysis:
1. Reducing the use of a personal car will increase the attractiveness of the city;
2. Reducing the use of the personal car will make it more difficult to get around the city;
3. Developing public transportation will make the city more livable;
4. Eliminating the use of a personal car will reduce the cost of getting around the city for residents;
5. Refusal to use a personal car will promote healthy lifestyles among the population;
6. Frequent use of public transportation will negatively affect the emotional health of the population;
7. Climate has a strong impact on the ability to use personal mobility (bicycles, scooters)
The results of the survey showed the following results: the highest percentage of votes was obtained in the statements: 6 - 90 (45%), 3 - 85 (42.5%), 2 - 83 (41.5%), which indicates a rather interesting trend: Kazan residents understand the importance and need to develop public transportation, but are not ready to switch to it and give up using a personal car, citing the more difficult movement around the city and the possible negative impact on emotional health and climatic conditions. In addition, most residents do not believe that reducing the use of a personal vehicle will increase the attractiveness of the city and reduce the cost of getting around the city (survey results: options 1 - 23 (11.5%) and 4 - 44 (22%)).
Based on the results of this question, we can conclude that residents support the initiative to develop public transport, but in this case they think not so much about replacing the personal car by public transport, but rather about improving the comfort of moving around the city of children, persons without a driver's license and/or car, etc.
The fourteenth question was aimed at determining the gender structure of the respondents:
Thus, 51% of males and 49% of females participated in the survey, indicating that both genders were equally interested in the topic.
The content analysis allowed us to determine that as a result of the annual rapid growth of the number of personal cars used as a means of transportation in the city, the residents of Kazan, the local authorities are faced with the most pressing issue of the introduction of restrictive measures for motorists, due to the negative impact of the large flow of cars on the comfortable living conditions in the city.
Over the past few years, developed countries have demonstrated a successful experience of partial/full renunciation of car use in the city/specific urban area.
There are four main trends that may determine the vector of development of Russian cities in relation to the problem of the possible abandonment of the use of private cars and the transition to public transport by citizens.
The main one is the objective and every year growing need to reduce the number of private cars and cases of their use in modern cities. Cars take up too much space, they require infrastructure, which has a negative impact on the urban environment.
The second trend is insufficient development of public transport in many Russian cities, using Kazan as an example. Thus, due to the dense flow of cars, undeveloped interchanges and lack of additional lanes exclusively for public transport, boarding and disembarking passengers cannot always be carried out properly. One of the reasons for the unsatisfactory state of public transport also include the untimely renewal of existing vehicles and repairs. Also at certain hours, citizens note the lack of public transport on certain routes, resulting in a significant increase in travel time.
The third trend is related to the prospect of the introduction of completely free public transport, thanks to the introduction of an additional tax on motorists.
The fourth trend is an increase in the proportion of citizens who are ready to switch to public transport.
The willingness to switch to public transport is also due to the awareness of environmental problems arising in particular from the intensive use of private cars.
Based on the content analysis, we can assume that the increasing need to reduce the number of cars in the near future will lead to the introduction of restrictive measures for motorists who prefer to use private cars as the main means of transport in the city. However, the unsatisfactory state of public transport may cause dissatisfaction on the part of citizens with these measures, so it is necessary to increase funding for the renewal of public transport and modernization of routes.
We consider the initiative of introducing free travel on public transport to be ineffective, as it may adversely affect the condition of the transport fund. It is also worth noting that residents are ready to give up their personal vehicles in favor of public transport in the case of increasing the comfort of using the latter. Thus, the main recommendation for local authorities is to implement a policy to modernize the transport fund and improve transportation routes in conjunction with the gradual introduction of restrictive measures for motorists.
After completing the study, we compiled a list of recommendations. But before proceeding to it, let us analyze the possible reasons for city residents to buy and use a personal car.
The first reason in favor of the car is the weather conditions in which most Russians have to live. Many drivers say that in a milder climate they could do without a car, but in winter it is too cold to wait at a bus stop, which means that a car is the only solution. The second argument is city size and distance. Car owners point out that moving long distances is impossible without a car. The third reason is the level of development of public transport. Car owners are dissatisfied with its congestion and irregularity. In some cities there is not enough public transport. The fourth factor in favor of the car is the status which the car gives to the owner. And finally, it is comfort which is difficult to provide in public transport.
And now let us consider the reasons why it is more profitable and rational for city dwellers to refuse to use a private car for their movements around the city. The first argument in favor of public transportation is the cost of car care. You do not just have to buy a car and fill it up regularly: the car owner will be faced with payments to insurance companies, preparations for maintenance inspections, tire and oil changes, and many other expenses that a public transportation passenger would never incur. The second reason is the environmental impact of cars. Where the emissions of poisonous substances would leave a hundred passenger cars, there could be one bus (that is, we are talking about minimizing the impact on the environment). The third point in favor of public transportation is the comfort and quality of life of the people around them. Often people do not realize that their ownership and use of a private car in the city can cause discomfort to other residents. The fourth argument is the time savings that occur to a person without a car. The pedestrian passenger does not have to think about where to park and how to maintain their car, there is no problem of long-term storage. The fifth argument lies in the plane of psychology: motorists have to go through more stress because of not always correct behavior of other drivers and the prospect of meeting with an inspector of the traffic police. For many, it is this factor that becomes the key factor in giving up a personal car.
Conclusion
As a result of our study, we have found that at the moment within the city of Kazan there is indeed a problem, which we put forward in the methodological part of the study. It is the inability to ensure at present the universal transition of residents from the use of private cars to the consumption of public transport services, due to the lack of development of appropriate infrastructure. Yet, there is an awareness of the need for such a process among Kazan residents.
Thus, having briefly considered two points of view, we can observe that each has the right to exist and its evidence base of arguments. Therefore, our recommendations will be aimed at eliminating the reasons which can make city dwellers want to own and use a personal car for their movements:
1) Eliminate the possible negative impact of weather conditions for moving around the city without a personal vehicle. This will not require the development of anything special, it will be enough to provide public transport with heating during the winter season, so that passengers feel comfortable by choosing this mode of transport. It will also be necessary to work out the stationary infrastructure of public transport to function in winter. For example, to provide stops with heating in cold weather, to make them closed from wind, snow and other weather conditions, to maintain a comfortable temperature for people.
2) To provide within the city a developed network of public transport for unimpeded movement to any point of the city. For this purpose, it will be enough to create several routes using different types of public transport along the most demanded ways of movement of the city residents, as well as to provide an opportunity to use at least one type of public transport for each resident regardless of which part of the city he/she is located in. In many ways public transport can be improved and made more versatile for moving around the city by interchange hubs, where a passenger can conveniently combine different modes of public transport when moving from point A to point B.
3) Invest the budget in the creation and functioning of public transport that meets all the needs of modern man (in comfort, in the speed of travel, in price, in accessibility of use, etc.). Often in Russia little importance is attached to public transport, especially in small towns, as a result of which it is in a neglected state and cannot meet the needs of residents, looks unattractive in their eyes. This problem can be solved by increasing funding for public transport and implementing programs for its development.
4) To give up the stereotypes of owning a private car. A private car is first of all a means of transportation. Now is not the XX century and having a personal car will not surprise anyone. People must stop considering a car as something special and vital for purchase, the refusal of which would be critical both for comfortable life and for the reputation of the person. In today's world, even well-to-do people may not feel disadvantaged in any way by using public transport (provided it is properly developed).
5) Create a network of public transport, not inferior to the comfort of using a private car to move around the city. It is possible to solve this task in many ways, including those already repeatedly mentioned earlier. For example, it is necessary to regularly monitor the condition of the rolling stock, to carry out in due time repairs and replacement with newer and more modern models. It is necessary to create conditions in which the use of public transport will be more attractive than the use of a private car. In Russia, unfortunately, a lot of attention is currently paid to the comfort of car owners (roads are widened, new lanes are added, new roads are built, the number of parking lots is increased, the maximum allowed speed is not reduced, etc.), while in the modern world it is more important to pay attention to the comfort of public transport passengers.
References
Andersson, A., Hiselius, L. W., & Adell, E. (2020). The effect of marketing messages on the motivation to reduce private car use in different segments. Transport Policy, 90, 22-30.
Andersson, A. (2020). Is climate morality the answer? Preconditions affecting the motivation to decrease private car use. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 78, 102198.
Bayart, C., Havet, N., Bonnel, P., & Bouzouina, L. (2020).Young people and the private car: A love-hate relationship. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 80, 102235.
Čulík, K., Kalašová, A., & Otahálová, Z. (2020). Alternative Taxi Services and their Cost Analysis. Transportation Research Procedia, 44, 240-247.
de-Miguel-Molina, M., de-Miguel-Molina, B., & Catalá-Pérez, D. (2021). The collaborative economy and taxi services: Moving towards new business models in Spain. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 39, 100503.
Ding, N., Pan, J., Zhang, Z., & Yang, J. (2019). Life cycle assessment of car sharing models and the effect on GWP of urban transportation: A case study of Beijing. Science of the total environment, 688, 1137-1144.
Gundlach, A., Ehrlinspiel, M., Kirsch, S., Koschker, A., & Sagebiel, J. (2018). Investigating people’s preferences for car-free city centers: A discrete choice experiment. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 63, 677-688.
Jochem, P., Frankenhauser, D., & Fromm, H. (2020). Does free-floating carsharing reduce private vehicle ownership? The case of SHARE NOW in European cities. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 141, 373-395.
Pavón, N., & Rizzi, L. I. (2019). Road infrastructure and public bus transport service provision under different funding schemes: A simulation analysis. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 125, 89-105.
Rudke, A. P., Martins, J. A., dos Santos, A. M., Silva, W. P., Caldana, N. F. D. S., Souza, V. A. S., Alves, R. A., & de Almeida, A. T. T.(2021). Spatialandsocio-economic analysis of public transport systems in large cities: A case study for Belo Horizonte, Brazil. Journal of Transport Geography, 91, 102975.
Saleem, M. A., Eagle, L., & Low, D. (2018).Climate change behaviors related to purchase and use of personal cars: Development and validation of eco-socially conscious consumer behavior scale. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 59, 68-85.
Sinha, Sh., Swamy, H. M. Sh., & Modi, Kh. (2020). User Perceptions of Public Transport Service Quality. Transportation Research Procedia, 48, 3310-3323.
Stryhul, M., Khomeriki, O., Mykhailych, O., Yahodzinskyi, S., Romanenko, Y., & Perelyhin, T. (2021).Functioning of Public Transport in the Social Space of the City. Transportation Research Procedia, 54, 610-616.
Suguiy, T., Henriques de Carvalho, M. F., & Ferreira, P. A. V. (2020). Efficiency versus satisfaction in public transport: Practices in Brazilian cities. Case Studies on Transport Policy, 8, 938-945.
Sun, Y., & Cui, Y. (2018). Evaluating the coordinated development of economic, social and environmental benefits of urban public transportation infrastructure: Case study of four Chinese autonomous municipalities. Transport Policy, 66, 116-126.
Tiwari, G., & Phillip, C. (2021). Development of public transport systems in small cities: A roadmap for achieving sustainable development goal indicator 11.2. IATSS Research, 3.
Tonn, G., Reilly, A., Czajkowski, J., Ghaedi, H., & Kunreuther, H. (2021). U.S. transportation infrastructure resilience: Influences of insurance, incentives, and public assistance. Transport Policy, 100, 108-119.
Urbanek, A. (2021). Potential of modal shift from private cars to public transport: A survey on the commuters’ attitudes and willingness to switch – A case study of Silesia Province, Poland. Research in Transportation Economics, 85, 101008.
Uskov, V., & Kharchenko, O. (2021). Regulating the Development of Transport Infrastructure in Megacities of the Russian Federation. Transportation Research Procedia, 54, 645-653.
Zakirova, A., Klychova, G., Khusainov, Sh., Zakirov, Z., Zakirov, A. (2021). Study of attitudes of Kazan residents to the perspective of refusing the use of a personal car as a means of transportation in the city. E3S Web of Conferences, 284, 11007
Copyright information
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
About this article
Publication Date
31 March 2022
Article Doi
eBook ISBN
978-1-80296-124-9
Publisher
European Publisher
Volume
125
Print ISBN (optional)
-
Edition Number
1st Edition
Pages
1-1329
Subjects
Freedom, philosophy, civilization, media, communication, information age, globalization
Cite this article as:
Klychova, G., Zakirova, A., Khusainov, S., Zakirov, Z., & Zakirov, A. (2022). Social And Economic Prospects For The Development Of Public Transport. In I. Savchenko (Ed.), Freedom and Responsibility in Pivotal Times, vol 125. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences (pp. 772-783). European Publisher. https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2022.03.91