IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cys/ecocyb/v50y2017i4p109-125.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analysis of Passenger’s Satisfaction with the Quality of the Public Transportation Mode Choices in Bucharest: A Fuzzy Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Sofia Elena COLESCA

    (The Bucharest University of Economic Studies)

  • Mihaela PACESILA

    (The Bucharest University of Economic Studies)

  • Stefan Gabriel BURCEA

    (The Bucharest University of Economic Studies)

  • Carmen Nadia CIOCOIU

    (The Bucharest University of Economic Studies)

  • Mihai BUGHEANU

    (The Bucharest University of Economic Studies)

Abstract

This paper analyses the passenger’s satisfaction towards the quality of existing public transportation mode choices in Bucharest. In order to eliminate the subjective factor from passenger’s judgment, we have used fuzzy multicriteria analysis method. The criteria have been grouped in six groups of satisfaction determinants: convenience of service, comfort, service reliability, safety and security, communication with passengers and price and affordability. According to the criteria analyzed, although the surface transport network offers a wider range of services, the respondents show an overwhelming preference for travelling by underground.

Suggested Citation

  • Sofia Elena COLESCA & Mihaela PACESILA & Stefan Gabriel BURCEA & Carmen Nadia CIOCOIU & Mihai BUGHEANU, 2017. "Analysis of Passenger’s Satisfaction with the Quality of the Public Transportation Mode Choices in Bucharest: A Fuzzy Approach," ECONOMIC COMPUTATION AND ECONOMIC CYBERNETICS STUDIES AND RESEARCH, Faculty of Economic Cybernetics, Statistics and Informatics, vol. 51(4), pages 109-125.
    • Handle: RePEc:cys:ecocyb:v:50:y:2017:i:4:p:109-125
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: ftp://www.eadr.ro/RePEc/cys/ecocyb_pdf/ecocyb4_2017p109-125.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chen, Chen-Tung & Lin, Ching-Torng & Huang, Sue-Fn, 2006. "A fuzzy approach for supplier evaluation and selection in supply chain management," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 289-301, August.
    2. Laura Antonucci & Corrado Crocetta & Francesco d’Ovidio & Ernesto Toma, 2014. "Passenger satisfaction: a multi-group analysis," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 337-345, January.
    3. Mouwen, Arnoud & Rietveld, Piet, 2013. "Does competitive tendering improve customer satisfaction with public transport? A case study for the Netherlands," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 29-45.
    4. dell'Olio, Luigi & Ibeas, Angel & Cecin, Patricia, 2011. "The quality of service desired by public transport users," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 217-227, January.
    5. Morfoulaki, Maria & Tyrinopoulos, Yannis & Aifadopoulou, Georgia, 2007. "Estimation of Satisfied Customers in Public Transport Systems: A New Methodological Approach," Journal of the Transportation Research Forum, Transportation Research Forum, vol. 46(1).
    6. Mokonyama, Mathetha & Venter, Christoffel, 2013. "Incorporation of customer satisfaction in public transport contracts – A preliminary analysis," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 58-66.
    7. Bezerra, George C.L. & Gomes, Carlos F., 2015. "The effects of service quality dimensions and passenger characteristics on passenger's overall satisfaction with an airport," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 44, pages 77-81.
    8. Ibarra-Rojas, O.J. & Delgado, F. & Giesen, R. & Muñoz, J.C., 2015. "Planning, operation, and control of bus transport systems: A literature review," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 38-75.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Carmen Nadia Ciocoiu & Adina Liliana Prioteasa & Sofia Elena Colesca, 2020. "Risk Management Implementation for Sustainable Development of Romanian SMEs: A Fuzzy Approach ...........," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 22(55), pages 726-726, August.
    2. Roşca Vlad I., 2019. "Costs a pretty penny: how household income impacts upon motorization in Europe and raises manufacturer branding challenges," Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Sciendo, vol. 13(1), pages 759-771, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sheng, Dian & Meng, Qiang, 2020. "Public bus service contracting: A critical review and future research opportunities," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    2. Chica-Olmo, Jorge & Gachs-Sánchez, Héctor & Lizarraga, Carmen, 2018. "Route effect on the perception of public transport services quality," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 40-48.
    3. Link, Heike, 2019. "The impact of including service quality into efficiency analysis: The case of franchising regional rail passenger serves in Germany," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 284-300.
    4. Epstein, Bryan & Givoni, Moshe, 2016. "Analyzing the gap between the QOS demanded by PT users and QOS supplied by service operators," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 622-637.
    5. Celik, Erkan & Aydin, Nezir & Gumus, Alev Taskin, 2014. "A multiattribute customer satisfaction evaluation approach for rail transit network: A real case study for Istanbul, Turkey," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 283-293.
    6. Abenoza, Roberto F. & Cats, Oded & Susilo, Yusak O., 2017. "Travel satisfaction with public transport: Determinants, user classes, regional disparities and their evolution," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 64-84.
    7. Zhang, Chunqin & Juan, Zhicai & Lu, Weite & Xiao, Guangnian, 2016. "Do the organizational forms affect passenger satisfaction? Evidence from Chinese public transport service," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 129-148.
    8. Wan, Dan & Kamga, Camille & Liu, Jun & Sugiura, Aaron & Beaton, Eric B., 2016. "Rider perception of a “light” Bus Rapid Transit system - The New York City Select Bus Service," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 41-55.
    9. Aydin, Nezir & Celik, Erkan & Gumus, Alev Taskin, 2015. "A hierarchical customer satisfaction framework for evaluating rail transit systems of Istanbul," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 61-81.
    10. Md Rokibul Islam & Md Hadiuzzaman & Rajib Banik & Md Mehedi Hasnat & Sarder Rafee Musabbir & Sanjana Hossain, 2016. "Bus service quality prediction and attribute ranking: a neural network approach," Public Transport, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 295-313, September.
    11. Abenoza, Roberto F. & Ettema, Dick F. & Susilo, Yusak O., 2018. "Do accessibility, vulnerability, opportunity, and travel characteristics have uniform impacts on the traveler’s experience?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 114(PA), pages 38-51.
    12. Rong, Rui & Liu, Lishan & Jia, Ning & Ma, Shoufeng, 2022. "Impact analysis of actual traveling performance on bus passenger’s perception and satisfaction," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 80-100.
    13. Iván Manuel Mendoza-Arango & Eneko Echaniz & Luigi dell’Olio & Eduardo Gutiérrez-González, 2020. "Weighted Variables Using Best-Worst Scaling in Ordered Logit Models for Public Transit Satisfaction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-20, July.
    14. Juan de Oña, 2022. "Service quality, satisfaction and behavioral intentions towards public transport from the point of view of private vehicle users," Transportation, Springer, vol. 49(1), pages 237-269, February.
    15. Aydin, Nezir, 2017. "A fuzzy-based multi-dimensional and multi-period service quality evaluation outline for rail transit systems," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 87-98.
    16. Chunqin Zhang & Daoyou Wang & Anning Ni & Xunyou Ni & Guangnian Xiao, 2019. "Different Effects of Contractual Form on Public Transport Satisfaction: Evidence from Large- and Medium-Sized Cities in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-21, October.
    17. Bellizzi, Maria Grazia & Eboli, Laura & Mazzulla, Gabriella & Postorino, Maria Nadia, 2022. "Classification trees for analysing highly educated people satisfaction with airlines’ services," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 199-211.
    18. Mouwen, Arnoud, 2015. "Drivers of customer satisfaction with public transport services," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 1-20.
    19. de Oña, Juan & de Oña, Rocío & Eboli, Laura & Mazzulla, Gabriella, 2016. "Index numbers for monitoring transit service quality," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 18-30.
    20. Celik, Erkan & Bilisik, Ozge Nalan & Erdogan, Melike & Gumus, Alev Taskin & Baracli, Hayri, 2013. "An integrated novel interval type-2 fuzzy MCDM method to improve customer satisfaction in public transportation for Istanbul," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 28-51.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    public transport; fuzzy method; quality; satisfaction; survey.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • R41 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Transportation Economics - - - Transportation: Demand, Supply, and Congestion; Travel Time; Safety and Accidents; Transportation Noise
    • R42 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Transportation Economics - - - Government and Private Investment Analysis; Road Maintenance; Transportation Planning

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cys:ecocyb:v:50:y:2017:i:4:p:109-125. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Corina Saman (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feasero.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.