Levels Of Car Use Research Articles

The Mobile Phone as a Tool in Family Life: Impact on Planning of Everyday Activities and Car Use

The purpose of this paper is to explore the relationships between aspects of time norms, planning of everyday activities, use of a mobile phone, and the car in families with children. The analysis is based on results from a survey with a random sample of 2000 respondents from families with children in Norway, 2005. The analysis shows that the mobile phone is very important in everyday communication among family members. Short planning time and use of the mobile phone go together. The general level of car use varies with planning horizon and the choice of the medium used for arranging and rearranging appointments. There is a relation between high frequency of car use, a short planning horizon and use of the mobile phone.

SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORTATION: A Psychological Perspective

This paper discusses possible contributions of psychologists to sustainable transportation. It is argued that in order to reach sustainable transportation, among others, behaviour changes of individual car users are needed. As transport policies will be more effective if they target important antecedents of travel behaviour, first, factors influencing such behaviour are discussed. It is argued that car use is very attractive and sometimes even necessary for many different reasons. This implies that a combination of policies is called for, each targeting different factors that support car use and hinder the use of more sustainable modes of transport. Next, the paper elaborates on policy strategies that may be employed to achieve sustainable transportation by changing car use. Increasing the attractiveness of sustainable transport modes by means of pull measures seems not sufficient to reduce the level of car use. Besides, car use should be made less attractive by means of push measures to force drivers to reconsider their travel behaviour. The acceptability of such policies may be increased by clearly communicating the aim of these policies, and the expected positive consequences (e.g., less congestion, improved environmental quality). Moreover, possible negative effects for individual freedom may be compensated by implementing additional policies aimed at facilitating the use of sustainable transport modes.

Car use: lust and must. Instrumental, symbolic and affective motives for car use

This paper reports results of two questionnaire studies aimed at examining various motives for car use. In the first study, a random selection of 185 respondents who possess a driving licence were interviewed. Respondents were recruited from the cities of Groningen and Rotterdam, The Netherlands. The sample of the second study comprised a random selection of 113 commuters who regularly travelled during rush hours in and around Rotterdam, a region in the west of the Netherlands. First, it was examined which categories of car use motives may be distinguished. As proposed by Dittmar’s (1992) [The social psychology of material possessions: to have is to be. Havester Wheatsheaf, Hemel Hempstead, UK; St. Martin’s Press, New York] model on the meaning of material possessions, results from both studies revealed that car use not only fulfils instrumental functions, but also important symbolic and affective functions. Second, it was studied to what extent these different motives are related to the level of car use. From the results of study 2, it appeared that commuter car use was most strongly related to symbolic and affective motives, and not to instrumental motives. Third, individual differences in the relative importance of the three categories of motives were investigated. In both studies, most group differences were found in the evaluation of the symbolic and affective motives (and not the instrumental ones). Especially frequent drivers, respondents with a positive car attitude, male and younger respondents valued these non-instrumental motives for car use. These results suggest that policy makers should not exclusively focus on instrumental motives for car use, but they should consider the many social and affective motives as well.

Another Look at Travel Patterns and Urban Form: The US and Great Britain

This paper explores the relationship between land-use patterns and individual mobility from a comparative international perspective. There is a vast literature on US automobile dependence. Major explanatory factors include: transport, housing, land-use and tax policy; per capita incomes; American cultural preferences; national geography; and the spatial structure of US metropolitan areas (itself a result of the first three factors). Emphasising the policy environment, many researchers have cast their analysis in comparative terms, noting the differences in automobile use between European countries and the US. It is argued that US patterns of metropolitan form, with low development densities and dispersed population and employment, reinforce vehicle dependence. In contrast, most European metropolitan areas, with higher densities and more centralised land-use patterns, have lower levels of car use. Stronger controls on land use employed in many European countries are seen as having preserved the compact form of metropolitan areas. These arguments imply significant relationships between land-use patterns and travel behaviour. Using travel diary data from the US and Great Britain, these relationships are compared across the two countries. It is found that differences in daily trips and miles travelled are explained by differences in both the urban form and household income. While the effect of income on daily travel is similar for the US and Great Britain, the effect of density is more pronounced in the US.

Towards marginal cost pricing: A comparison of alternative pricing systems

European urban areas are marred by the problems of congestion and environmental degradation due to the prevailing levels of car use. Strong arguments have thus been put forward in support of a policy based on marginal cost pricing (European Commission 1996). Such policy measures – which would force private consumers to pay for a public service that was previously provided "for free" – are, however, notoriously unpopular with the general public and hence also with their elected representatives – the politicians. There is thus an obvious tension between economic theory, which suggests that marginal cost pricing is the welfare maximising solution to urban transport problems, and practical experience, which suggests that such pricing measures are unwanted by the affected population and hence hard to implement through democratic processes. The AFFORD Project for the European Commission has aimed to investigate this paradox and its possible solutions, through a combination of economic analysis, predictive modelling, attitudinal surveys, and an assessment of fiscal and financial measures within a number of case study cities in Europe. In this paper the methodology and results obtained for the Edinburgh case study are reported in detail. The study analyses alternative road pricing instruments and compares their performance against the theoretical first best situation. It discusses the effect of coverage, location, charging mechanism and interaction with other instruments. The paper shows that limited coverage in one mode may lead to a deviation from the user pays principle in other modes, that location is as important as charge levels and that assumptions about the use of revenues are critical in determining the effect on equity and acceptability. Finally the results show that a relatively simple smart card system can come close to providing the economic first best solution, but that this result should be viewed in the context of the model assumptions.

Land use and transport: research and policy challenges

In the debate on the impacts of land use on transport two questions are of particular importance: (1) does land use affect travel behaviour and (2) if land use affects travel behaviour, should land-use policies be partly based on (expected or assumed) transport impacts? There is enough evidence to conclude that land use can influence travel behaviour. However, this does not mean that policy-makers should choose land-use alternatives with the lowest level of car use. Possible future land-use and transport plans should be evaluated according to a broad range of factors. Several challenges for research and policy-making related to these aspects are presented here.