IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i10p5574-d555967.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Decision-Making Process for Demand Response Public Transportation Service Design—A Case Study in Incheon, Korea

Author

Listed:
  • Chang-Gyun Roh

    (Smart Mobility Research Center, Department of Future Technology and Convergence Research, Korea Institute of Civil Engineering and Building Technology, Gyeonggi 10223, Korea)

  • Hyeonmyeong Jeon

    (ITS Performance Evaluation Center, Korea Institute of Civil Engineering and Building Technology, Gyeonggi 10223, Korea)

Abstract

Incheon is a major city comprising the metropolitan area around Seoul. However, it ranks the lowest in terms of road extension scale relative to population and number of vehicles. There is extreme traffic congestion and shortages of parking spaces in downtown Incheon, impacting traffic. Alternative policies of the municipal government to address these issues, including road extension and improving public transportation, have not shown results because of the low satisfaction level of the public transportation service and limited transportation mode transfer owing to travel within the metropolitan area. Therefore, to improve the public transportation service, conducting a comprehensive analysis on the current service and improving its quality were deemed necessary. Additionally, adopting a demand response public transportation service was considered. In conjunction, objective and easy-to-use data should be used, so that if anyone repeats the procedure, the same result should be obtained. For this, we propose the simplest process. Thus, to introduce the service, this study presents a decision-making process by establishing a regional prioritizing methodology based on the transportation environment satisfaction level, average access time to major facilities, public transportation competitiveness, personal vehicle demand, and existing public transit routes. To assess the methodology feasibility and conformity, user satisfaction was analyzed in Jung-gu, Incheon. The analysis showed 91% user satisfaction, verifying that the demand response public transportation service was effectively supplied. This analysis process will be useful when applying and expanding new transportation services.

Suggested Citation

  • Chang-Gyun Roh & Hyeonmyeong Jeon, 2021. "Decision-Making Process for Demand Response Public Transportation Service Design—A Case Study in Incheon, Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-19, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:10:p:5574-:d:555967
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/10/5574/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/10/5574/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pauline Zardo & Adrian G Barnett & Nicolas Suzor & Tim Cahill, 2018. "Does engagement predict research use? An analysis of The Conversation Annual Survey 2016," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(2), pages 1-21, February.
    2. Velaga, Nagendra R. & Beecroft, Mark & Nelson, John D. & Corsar, David & Edwards, Peter, 2012. "Transport poverty meets the digital divide: accessibility and connectivity in rural communities," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 102-112.
    3. Steve Wright, 2013. "Designing flexible transport services: guidelines for choosing the vehicle type," Transportation Planning and Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(1), pages 76-92, February.
    4. Elisabetta Vitale Brovarone & Giancarlo Cotella, 2020. "Improving Rural Accessibility: A Multilayer Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-20, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Lisa Bauchinger & Anna Reichenberger & Bryonny Goodwin-Hawkins & Jurij Kobal & Mojca Hrabar & Theresia Oedl-Wieser, 2021. "Developing Sustainable and Flexible Rural–Urban Connectivity through Complementary Mobility Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-23, January.
    2. Olsen, Jonathan R. & Thornton, Lukar & Tregonning, Grant & Mitchell, Richard, 2022. "Nationwide equity assessment of the 20-min neighbourhood in the scottish context: A socio-spatial proximity analysis of residential locations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 315(C).
    3. Elisabetta Vitale Brovarone & Giancarlo Cotella, 2020. "Improving Rural Accessibility: A Multilayer Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-20, April.
    4. Schasché, Stephanie E. & Sposato, Robert G. & Hampl, Nina, 2022. "The dilemma of demand-responsive transport services in rural areas: Conflicting expectations and weak user acceptance," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 43-54.
    5. Awaworyi Churchill, Sefa & Koomson, Isaac & Munyanyi, Musharavati Ephraim, 2023. "Transport poverty and obesity: The mediating roles of social capital and physical activity," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 155-166.
    6. Mounce, Richard & Beecroft, Mark & Nelson, John D., 2020. "On the role of frameworks and smart mobility in addressing the rural mobility problem," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    7. Akpan, Uduak & Morimoto, Risako, 2022. "An application of Multi-Attribute Utility Theory (MAUT) to the prioritization of rural roads to improve rural accessibility in Nigeria," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 82(PB).
    8. Venter, Christoffel J. & Molomo, Malesela & Mashiri, Mac, 2014. "Supply and pricing strategies of informal rural transport providers," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 239-248.
    9. Mulley, Corinne & Nelson, John D. & Ho, Chinh & Hensher, David A., 2023. "MaaS in a regional and rural setting: Recent experience," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 75-85.
    10. Dantsuji, Takao & Takayama, Yuki & Fukuda, Daisuke, 2023. "Perimeter control in a mixed bimodal bathtub model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 267-291.
    11. Ruqin Yang & Yaolin Liu & Yanfang Liu & Hui Liu & Wenxia Gan, 2019. "Comprehensive Public Transport Service Accessibility Index—A New Approach Based on Degree Centrality and Gravity Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-20, October.
    12. Joseph G. Walters & Stuart Marsh & Lucelia Rodrigues, 2022. "Planning Perspectives on Rural Connected, Autonomous and Electric Vehicle Implementation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-20, January.
    13. Nerhagen, Lena & Brandt, Daniel & Mortazavi, Reza, 2023. "Use of public transport as a means to reach national climate objectives - On the importance of accounting for spatial differences and costs," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 56-65.
    14. Stefan Illgen & Michael Höck, 2020. "Establishing car sharing services in rural areas: a simulation-based fleet operations analysis," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 811-826, April.
    15. Antonín Vaishar & Milada Šťastná, 2021. "Accessibility of Services in Rural Areas: Southern Moravia Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-19, August.
    16. Knierim, Lukas & Schlüter, Jan Christian, 2021. "The attitude of potentially less mobile people towards demand responsive transport in a rural area in central Germany," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    17. Elzbieta Szymanska & Zofia Koloszko-Chomentowska, 2022. "Sustainable Innovative Mobility Solutions Preferred by Inhabitants of Rural Areas—The Case of Lithuania and Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-21, May.
    18. Gary Bosworth & Liz Price & Martin Collison & Charles Fox, 2020. "Unequal futures of rural mobility: Challenges for a “Smart Countrysideâ€," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 35(6), pages 586-608, September.
    19. Mona Jabbari & Fernando Fonseca & Rui Ramos, 2018. "Combining multi-criteria and space syntax analysis to assess a pedestrian network: the case of Oporto," Journal of Urban Design, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(1), pages 23-41, January.
    20. Kolodinsky, Jane M. & Battista, Geoffrey & Roche, Erin & Lee, Brian H.Y. & Johnson, Rachel K., 2017. "Estimating the effect of mobility and food choice on obesity in a rural, northern environment," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 30-39.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:10:p:5574-:d:555967. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.