Car use in the sprawled urban region of Noord‐Brabant is above the Dutch average. Does this reflect car dependency due to the lack of competitive alternative modes? Or are there other factors at play, such as differences in preferences? This article aims to determine the nature of car use in the region and explore to what extent this reflects car dependency. The data, comprising 3,244 respondents was derived from two online questionnaires among employees from the High‐Tech Campus (2018) and the TU/e‐campus (2019) in Eindhoven. Travel times to work by car, public transport, cycling, and walking were calculated based on the respondents’ residential location. Indicators for car dependency were developed using thresholds for maximum commuting times by bicycle and maximum travel time ratios between public transport and car. Based on these thresholds, approximately 40% of the respondents were categorised as car‐dependent. Of the non‐car‐dependent respondents, 31% use the car for commuting. A binomial logit model revealed that higher residential densities and closer proximity to a railway station reduce the odds of car commuting. Travel time ratios also have a significant influence on the expected directions. Mode choice preferences (e.g., comfort, flexibility, etc.) also have a significant, and strong, impact. These results highlight the importance of combining hard (e.g., improvements in infrastructure or public transport provi-sion) and soft (information and persuasion) measures to reduce car use and car dependency in commuting trips.
MULTIFILE
While sustainability of transport projects is of increasing importance, the concept of sustainability can be understood in many different ways by the stakeholders that are involved in or affected by mobility projects. In this paper, we compare the outcomes of the assessment of sustainability of projects through a multi-criteria analysis (MCA) and the appraisal of stakeholder preferences through the multi-actor multi-criteria analysis (MAMCA). Evaluating projects with both tools and comparing the outcomes can provide insight into the stakeholder support of sustainable solutions and the sustainability of alternatives preferred by stakeholders. The sustainability of projects is assessed through 16 criteria grouped under the three pillars of sustainability. They were selected by in-depth review of 16 case studies of mobility projects, 18 transport evaluation schemes and the ranking of potential criteria by 214 stakeholders in North-West Europe. These criteria were weighted by 93 representatives of decision makers in the mobility domain. Stakeholder preferences were appraised through the criteria identified for each stakeholder group. We illustrate the framework by evaluating alternative solutions to improve cycling connections between the towns of Tilburg and Waalwijk in the Netherlands. The results of the comparison show that stakeholder preferences are biased towards one or two of the sustainability pillars (economy, environment, society) in three ways: through the selection of the criteria by the stakeholders, the weights of each criterion by each stakeholder group and differences in the final ranking of alternatives between the stakeholder groups and the MCA.
MULTIFILE
The livability of the cities and attractiveness of our environment can be improved by smarter choices for mobility products and travel modes. A change from current car-dependent lifestyles towards the use of healthier and less polluted transport modes, such as cycling, is needed. With awareness campaigns, cycling facilities and cycle infrastructure, the use of the bicycle will be stimulated. But which campaigns are effective? Can we stimulate cycling by adding cycling facilities along the cycle path? How can we design the best cycle infrastructure for a region? And what impact does good cycle infrastructure have on the increase of cycling?To find answers for these questions and come up with a future approach to stimulate bicycle use, BUas is participating in the InterReg V NWE-project CHIPS; Cycle Highways Innovation for smarter People transport and Spatial planning. Together with the city of Tilburg and other partners from The Netherlands, Belgium, Germany and United Kingdom we explore and demonstrate infrastructural improvements and tackle crucial elements related to engaging users and successful promotion of cycle highways. BUas is responsible for the monitoring and evaluation of the project. To measure the impact and effectiveness of cycle highway innovations we use Cyclespex and Cycleprint.With Cyclespex a virtual living lab is created which we will use to test several readability and wayfinding measures for cycle infrastructure. Cyclespex gives us the opportunity to test different scenario’s in virtual reality that will help us to make decisions about the final solution that will be realized on the cycle highway. Cycleprint will be used to develop a monitoring dashboard where municipalities of cities can easily monitor and evaluate the local bicycle use.
