Differences in ride-hailing adoption by older californians among types of locations

Ride-hailing services such as Lyft and Uber can complement rides offered by family, friends, paid providers, and public transit. To learn why older adults might wish to use ride-hail, we conducted an online survey of 2,917 California respondents age 55 and older. Participants were asked whether they would value four features hypothesized to be benefits of ride-hailing. We specified binary logit models and used market segmentation to investigate whether there were location-based differences in the use of ride-hailing. Our analysis showed that women, city dwellers, persons with disabilities, and those who rely on others for rides were more open to ride-hailing. Women in suburbs or small town/ rural settings were more likely to ride-hail than their male counterparts for reasons of independence, fear of being lost while driving, or getting help with carrying bags. Urban women, in contrast, were less likely than their male counterparts to ride-hail for these reasons. High-income individuals in suburbs or small town/rural locations were more likely to ride-hail than low-income respondents, while high-income urban residents were less likely to ride-hail. Adoption of ride-hailing services and the reasons for doing so showed strong variability by location even among respondents with similar socio-demographic attributes

Will Ride-Hailing Enhance Mobility for Older Adults? A California Survey

Ride-hailing services such as Lyft and Uber offer a potential mobility option for the growing numbers of aging Californians who risk social and economic isolation if they cannot drive for health or financial reasons. They could also serve older adults who currently have mobility options but would prefer a ride-hailing alternative for at least some trips. This study addressed whether and how older Californians use ride-hailing, as well as the potential of this travel mode to meet the needs of older adults now and in the coming decade. An online survey was completed by 2,917 California adults aged 55 and older. This age range was chosen to include both current seniors (age 65 and older) and individuals who will soon be entering that age group (age 55 to 64). The survey explored whether older Californians who have access to the internet used ride-hailing, how comfortable they were with ride-hailing service features that might present barriers to usage, whether they would value potential new ride-hailing service features designed to improve safety, accessibility, and payment options, and what reasons (if any) they saw to use ride-hailing. We also collected data on various factors hypothesized to influence ride-hailing use and behaviors, such as use of the internet and online banking. Key survey findings indicated that 44% of respondents 65 years old and older had experienced ride-hailing and 27% had booked a ride themselves via phone or using the app. Also, the potential new ride-hailing service features that appealed to large numbers of today’s and tomorrow’s seniors include having a driver trained to help older passengers and the option to pay with a ride-hailing card that is not linked to a bank account or credit card. Results also indicated that there were fewer large variations by personal characteristics than we anticipated would influence ride- hailing behavior and attitudes, such as gender, age, and regular use of technology. However, there were some clear differences by population subgroups, most noticeably by income, education, community type (e.g., urban vs. rural), and use of public transit

The Rapid Rise of Middle-Class Vehicle Ownership in Mumbai

In India, demand for urban mobility is increasing rapidly because of growth in urban populations, establishment of multiple employment sub-centers, suburbanization of households, better education, higher workforce participation rates, and rising incomes. An increase in discretionary spending is leading to higher household transportation budgets. Middle-income households in particular are investing in private vehicles such as motorized two-wheelers (TWs) and cars. At the same time, policies to reduce vehicle ownership through regulations and user costs remain underdeveloped and weakly enforced. This further increases households' willingness to use vehicles, especially for non-discretionary work trips. Higher private vehicle use is affecting other quality of life issues such as time spent commuting, accident rates, noise pollution, and particulate and greenhouse gas emissions. In part, this higher vehicle ownership and use is driven by land use dynamics in Indian cities, where growth within city municipal boundaries is constrained by regulations limiting floor-area ratios. As a result, much of the new growth has taken place in urban peripheries where land is cheap and building costs are low. In these peripheral areas, existing small and medium towns have become anchors for agglomeration, transforming into bedroom communities for emergent middle-class groups. Urban peripheral areas are usually undersupplied with transportation infrastructure such as roads or bus transit. This dissertation unpacks the question of why the middle-class in India is driven to owning and using TWs and cars by asking the following: (1) How does work location influence travel by public and private modes? (2) What factors encourage vehicle ownership in middle-class households? (3) What factors drive up vehicle use in middle-class households? The research was conducted using a travel survey dataset from the Greater Mumbai Region (GMR) that represents 1.5% of the households there. The GMR is among the most populated megacity regions in the world, housing over 22 million people. Its growth illustrates the transformation from a monocentric to a polycentric city which is seen in many rapidly growing Indian cities. In seeking to develop an understanding of how work location affected travel, this research identified employment sub-centers using work destination data. Of all middle-class home-based work trips, 67 percent ended in a sub-center, while 33 percent did not. Mean travel times and mean travel distances by train, TW and intermediate public transportation (IPT) modes such as rickshaws were longer for work destinations in sub-centers than for work destinations in the urban periphery, but trips made by buses were shorter in sub-centers. Car users traveled longer and farther compared to TW users for home-based work trips in the GMR. Trains were the speediest mode of travel in the GMR, but traveling by a TW or car was speedier than bus or IPT travel--confirming that having a private vehicle has advantages. This research used a multinomial logit model to analyze households' choice of having no vehicles, only TWs, or at least one car. Results indicated that household utility from both TWs and cars increased with household characteristics such as per capita annual income, living in an independent house or an apartment, number of rooms in the housing unit, housing location farther from a railway station, the presence of children under 5 years, and larger household size. Moreover, vehicle utility for households increased with the primary wage earner's characteristics including college education, employment, being married, making more trips across all modes, traveling during the morning peak, and working in the urban periphery. Household utility from both TWs and cars decreased when the primary wage earner had longer work trips and higher employment density at the work location. Regression models for vehicle kilometers traveled (VKT) and person kilometers traveled (PKT) for cars and TWs showed that vehicle use increased with number of employed persons in the household, and if the primary wage earner worked in the urban core. Vehicle use decreased if density of housing and jobs went up at either the home or work location. TW use went down with per capita annual household income. Overall findings indicate that demand for private vehicles is rising due to the following factors: better education, employment, higher incomes, suburbanization, peripheral employment node formation, and lack of public travel options. However, higher density decreases vehicle use. Without changes in policies encouraging higher well-managed densities, jobs-housing balance, and supply of adequate transit and IPT travel options, vehicle ownership and use will likely continue to grow rapidly in India

The Rapid Rise of Middle-Class Vehicle Ownership in Mumbai

In India, demand for urban mobility is increasing rapidly because of growth in urbanpopulations, establishment of multiple employment sub-centers, suburbanization of households,better education, higher workforce participation rates, and rising incomes. An increase in discretionary spending is leading to higher household transportation budgets. Middle-income households in particular are investing in private vehicles such as motorized two-wheelers (TWs)and cars. At the same time, policies to reduce vehicle ownership through regulations and usercosts remain underdeveloped and weakly enforced. This further increases households’willingness to use vehicles, especially for non-discretionary work trips. Higher private vehicleuse is affecting other quality of life issues such as time spent commuting, accident rates, noisepollution, and particulate and greenhouse gas emissions.In part, this higher vehicle ownership and use is driven by land use dynamics in Indiancities, where growth within city municipal boundaries is constrained by regulations limitingfloor-area ratios. As a result, much of the new growth has taken place in urban peripheries whereland is cheap and building costs are low. In these peripheral areas, existing small and mediumtowns have become anchors for agglomeration, transforming into bedroom communities foremergent middle-class groups. Urban peripheral areas are usually undersupplied withtransportation infrastructure such as roads or bus transit.This dissertation unpacks the question of why the middle-class in India is driven toowning and using TWs and cars by asking the following: (1) How does work location influencetravel by public and private modes? (2) What factors encourage vehicle ownership in middleclasshouseholds? (3) What factors drive up vehicle use in middle-class households? Theresearch was conducted using a travel survey dataset from the Greater Mumbai Region (GMR)that represents 1.5% of the households there. The GMR is among the most populated megacityregions in the world, housing over 22 million people. Its growth illustrates the transformationfrom a monocentric to a polycentric city which is seen in many rapidly growing Indian cities.In seeking to develop an understanding of how work location affected travel, thisresearch identified employment sub-centers using work destination data. Of all middle-class2home-based work trips, 67 percent ended in a sub-center, while 33 percent did not. Mean traveltimes and mean travel distances by train, TW and intermediate public transportation (IPT) modessuch as rickshaws were longer for work destinations in sub-centers than for work destinations inthe urban periphery, but trips made by buses were shorter in sub-centers. Car users traveledlonger and farther compared to TW users for home-based work trips in the GMR. Trains werethe speediest mode of travel in the GMR, but traveling by a TW or car was speedier than bus orIPT travel—confirming that having a private vehicle has advantages.This research used a multinomial logit model to analyze households’ choice of having novehicles, only TWs, or at least one car. Results indicated that household utility from both TWsand cars increased with household characteristics such as per capita annual income, living in anindependent house or an apartment, number of rooms in the housing unit, housing locationfarther from a railway station, the presence of children under 5 years, and larger household size.Moreover, vehicle utility for households increased with the primary wage earner’s characteristicsincluding college education, employment, being married, making more trips across all modes,traveling during the morning peak, and working in the urban periphery. Household utility fromboth TWs and cars decreased when the primary wage earner had longer work trips and higheremployment density at the work location.Regression models for vehicle kilometers traveled (VKT) and person kilometers traveled(PKT) for cars and TWs showed that vehicle use increased with number of employed persons inthe household, and if the primary wage earner worked in the urban core. Vehicle use decreased ifdensity of housing and jobs went up at either the home or work location. TW use went downwith per capita annual household income.Overall findings indicate that demand for private vehicles is rising due to the followingfactors: better education, employment, higher incomes, suburbanization, peripheral employmentnode formation, and lack of public travel options. However, higher density decreases vehicle use.Without changes in policies encouraging higher well-managed densities, jobs-housing balance,and supply of adequate transit and IPT travel options, vehicle ownership and use will likelycontinue to grow rapidly in India

California Housing Trends: Implications for Transportation Planning

A broad range of population forecasts and historic trends indicate that significant growth is on the horizon for California. Although population growth by geographic regions, racial/ethic groups, and age will vary, growth is a consistent trend. Naturally, growth in population implies growth in households and demand for housing units. It is imperative that any evaluation of regional growth trends to aid transportation infrastructure planning must look at housing patterns to grasp the complete picture

California Housing Trends: Implications for Transportation Planning

A broad range of population forecasts and historic trends indicate that significant growth is on the horizon for California. Although population growth by geographic regions, racial/ethic groups, and age will vary, growth is a consistent trend. Naturally, growth in population implies growth in households and demand for housing units. It is imperative that any evaluation of regional growth trends to aid transportation infrastructure planning must look at housing patterns to grasp the complete picture.

Study of Park-and-Ride Facilities and Their Use in the San Francisco Bay Area of California

Park-and-ride lots are important support facilities for transit and ridesharing in the San Francisco Bay Area of California. The authors designed and carried out the region’s first large-scale, detailed study of park-and-ride facilities and users. Three Bay Area Rapid Transit (rail) station parking lots were also surveyed. The user survey results showed that almost all the parking users were commuters; at the freeway lots, half were transit users and the remainder were organized and casual carpoolers. Most drove alone to the park-and-ride lot and made long trips to work, many more than 30 mi one way. Users had concerns about lot security, the lack of lighting, and the quality of transit services offered. Analysis of focus group data determined that schedule adherence rather than frequency was the cause of most concerns. Participants expressed a willingness to pay for parking that was fenced, security patrolled, and lighted, with shelters for waiting. Together, the surveys and focus groups have provided insights into ways to improve the park-and-ride lots and the services offered there, as well as on how travelers view transit and carpooling options. The results provide a sound basis for planning improvements

A Study of Park and Ride Facilities and Their Use in the San Francisco Bay Area

Park-and-ride lots are important support facilities for transit and ride-sharing in the San Francisco Bay Area of California. The authors designed and carried out the region’s first large-scale, detailed study of park-and-ride facilities and users. Three Bay Area Rapid Transit (rail) station parking lots were also surveyed. The user survey results showed that almost all the parking users were commuters; at the freeway lots, half were transit users and the remainder were organized and casual car-poolers. Most drove alone to the park-and-ride lot and made long trips to work, more than 30 mi one way. Users had concerns about lot security, the lack of lighting, and the quality of transit services offered. Analysis of focus group data determined that schedule adherence rather than frequency was the cause of most concerns. Participants expressed a willingness to pay for parking that was fenced, security patrolled, and lighted, with shelters for waiting. Together, the surveys and focus groups have provided insights into ways to improve the park-and-ride lots and the services offered there, as well as on how travelers view transit and carpooling options. The results provide a sound basis for planning improvements