This study aims at understanding, from a gender perspective, the reasons behind citizens’ choice of using public transport, and whether this choice is driven by pro-environmental behaviour. Using Eurobarometer data (2013), we perform ordered logistic regressions comparatively for Germany, Italy and the Netherlands. Financial, political and environmental factors are shown to have significant roles in shaping travel behaviours, with interesting gender and cross-country differences

Castellano R.

PANARELLO, DEMETRIO

Punzo G.

English

Archivio della ricerca - Università degli studi di Napoli &quot;Parthenope&quot;

2Gennaro Punzo, Rosalia Castellano, and Demetrio PanarelloUnderstanding pro-environmental travel behaviours in Western Europe	5Understanding pro-environmental travel behaviours in Western EuropeAnalisi delle scelte di trasporto pro-ambientali nell’Europa OccidentaleGennaro Punzo, Rosalia Castellano, and Demetrio Panarello1​[1]​Abstract This study aims at understanding, from a gender perspective, the reasons behind citizens’ choice of using public transport, and whether this choice is driven by pro-environmental behaviour. Using Eurobarometer data (2013), we perform ordered logistic regressions comparatively for Germany, Italy and the Netherlands. Financial, political and environmental factors are shown to have significant roles in shaping travel behaviours, with interesting gender and cross-country differences.Abstract Questo studio esplora, in una prospettiva di genere, i fattori che indirizzano i cittadini alla preferenza del trasporto pubblico, con l’intento di indagare se tale scelta sia anche dettata da atteggiamenti pro-ambientali. L’analisi è eseguita su dati Eurobarometro (2013) in un’ottica di comparazione internazionale tra Germania, Italia e Olanda. I modelli di regressione logistica ordinale consentono una valutazione del ruolo che le componenti finanziarie, politiche e ambientali svolgono nella definizione dei comportamenti di viaggio, evidenziando tratti distintivi per genere e Paese.Keywords: Sustainable transport, Cross-country comparison, Gender-based analysis1	IntroductionDealing with personal transportation is one of the major environmental challenges in current years when the car is the leading travel mode. In Europe, car use growth accelerated sharply during the last decades [1], until exceeding 80% of inland passenger transport at the beginning of the 2000s. Since then, the share of passenger transport by car was within the range 83% to 83.7% up to 2015 – against 7.7% for trains and 9.2% for motor coaches, buses and trolley buses (Eurostat database) – and it is expected to keep its dominant position in the future.Traffic that is not properly managed generates serious consequences for human health and large scale social and environmental problems with detrimental effects on climate changes, as well as negative emotional reactions because of noise and pollution in urban areas [5,7]. This is why many world’s countries are making significant efforts to develop pro-environmental behaviours (PEBs) associated with transportation to meet the environmental challenge in the path to sustainability – e.g., Kyoto Protocol (1997), White Paper “European Transport Policy” (2001).A widespread literature investigates the complexity of PEBs at the individual and social level by multiple perspectives. All these conceptual models, together with the recent approaches on cultural participation and civic virtue [6], have proved to be complementary as a way of providing policy makers with solid grounds to better recognise socio-economic behaviours and to design interventions for environmental sustainability [8]. Specific travel behaviours, which are usually distinctly gender-related, should constitute as small a burden on the environment as possible. For example, measures aimed at taming the car (i.e., by providing safe and inexpensive alternatives to private motor vehicles such as walking, cycling, and public transport) could be viable ways to create more sustainable transport systems [1,7].By considering the choice of transport mode as a pro-environmental proxy of sustainability [1,8], this paper performs a comparative investigation in three Western European countries (Germany, Italy and the Netherlands) of the reasons behind citizens’ choice of using public transport (PT) rather than private transportation modes, and whether this choice is driven by sustainable behaviour. Indeed, all these countries are leaders in sustainable mobility in some respects (see [4]). The research hypothesis assumes that the impact of the variety of objective and subjective factors on the use of public service differ across countries, whereby the differentials among countries should also be analysed from a gender perspective.2	Methodology and dataOne of the main elements of novelty of this work is that it links research on the driving forces of PT usage across countries to the assessment of PEBs from a gender perspective. Methodologically, we estimate ordered logistic regressions by country and gender on a set of covariates, which are grouped into three dimensions (travel mode choice, own financial perception, politics and environment) supposed to influence the frequency of use of PT (yi, manifest variable), controlling for a range of personal socio-demographic characteristics.An underlying decisional process – based on a comparison among the utilities of different travel modes, leading to the choice of using PT – is expected. Therefore, a continuous unobservable propensity (yi*, latent variable) would cross thresholds (τ) that differentiate adjacent levels of the observed ordered yi’s. It follows that a cumulative model for the ordered logit model is equivalent to a system composed of a set of thresholds τm and a linear regression model for an underlying continuous response. The latent variable, which represents the relative advantage of using PT, is supposed to be linearly related to the observed x’s through the structural model:		                                                                             (1)where β is the vector of coefficients and εi is the error term with mean zero and standard deviation π/√3.The manifest ordinal variable (yi), which measures PT use frequency through a 7-point Likert scale, is related to yi* according to the following model:                      (2)where m identifies the seven levels (J=7) of the manifest variable (never, less than twice a month, two/three times a month, about once a week, two/three times a week, once a day, several times a day) and τ the estimated thresholds on a latent variable used to differentiate the levels of PT usage.The probability that the individual i will select the alternative m is:                                      (3)    where F is the logistic cumulative density function (c.d.f.).We use Eurobarometer data on the attitudes of Europeans towards urban mobility [3]. This survey, carried out in the EU-28 between May and June 2013, consisted in conducting face-to-face interviews in people’s homes to look at their transport habits, experiences, opinions and expectations. In all three countries, it is possible to drive with supervision at age 17, and without supervision at 18. This is why we include only individuals aged 18 and above (until 79), as the use of PT before that age is driven by necessity rather than personal choice​[2]​.3	Main results and discussionTables 1 and 2 show our main results for men and women, respectively​[3]​. A brief focus on the outcomes from each country follows.Table 1: Ordered logit estimation – Men (2013)Variables	Coefficients	Germany	Italy	NetherlandsSocio-demographic			Marital status (1: married)	-0.200	-0.356	-0.467*Age at completion of education (1: <16 years)	-0.340	-0.367	-0.987**Age (1: 61-79 years)	-0.472**	-0.801***	-0.631***Job level (1: professional/manager)	-0.206	 0.326	 0.273Community (1: city; 0: town/rural)	 1.166***	 0.955***	 0.544**Children (1: aged < 10)	-0.088	-0.086	-0.126Travel mode choice#			Car use frequency: every day	-2.355***	-0.574	-2.128***Car use frequency: every week	-1.183***	 0.772	-0.841*Bicycle use frequency: every day	 0.193	 1.197***	 1.305***Bicycle use frequency: every week	 0.825***	 0.941***	 0.811***Pedestrian paths use frequency: every day	 1.167***	 0.855***	 0.612**Pedestrian paths use frequency: every week	 0.741**	 0.408	 0.200Urban travel frequency: every day	 0.883***	 0.540	 0.618**Urban travel frequency: every week	 0.589**	 0.490	 0.217Own financial perception			Cost of living (1: good)	 0.295	-0.070	 0.347Cost of energy (1: good)	 0.318	 0.457	-0.075Household financial situation (1: good)	-0.143	 0.389*	 0.611Car ownership (1: yes)	-0.554*	-1.115***	 0.328Apartment/house ownership (1: yes)	-0.248	 0.011	-0.001Politics and Environment			Road congestion issues (1: important)	-0.107	-0.344	-0.490**Air pollution issues (1: important)	-0.051	-0.236	-0.513**Travel cost issues (1: important)	-0.313	 0.310	 0.606**Lower public transport prices (1: important)	 0.657***	-0.215	-0.281EU policies against poverty (1: important)	-0.650***	-0.187	-0.312Higher public transport quality (1: important)	 0.296*	 0.012	 0.599***Better walking facilities (1: important)	-0.127	-0.001	 0.441*Better cycling facilities (1: important)	 0.179	-0.590**	 0.058Access time restrictions (1: important)	-0.587**	 0.209	-0.098Car sharing incentives (1: important)	 0.422**	-0.486*	 0.203Urban traffic responsibles (1: citizens)	 0.089	-0.156	-0.503**Notes: *p<0.10; **p<0.05; ***p<0.01     #Reference: less than once a weekTable 2: Ordered logit estimation – Women (2013)Variables	Coefficients	Germany	Italy	NetherlandsSocio-demographic			Marital status (1: married)	-0.331	 0.251	-0.880***Age at completion of education (1: <16 years)	-0.298	-1.012***	-0.638*Age (1: 61-79 years)	-0.384*	-0.280	-0.306Job level (1: professional/manager)	 0.316	 0.509*	-0.003Community (1: city; 0: town/rural)	 1.636***	 0.390*	 0.554**Children (1: aged < 10)	-0.219	-0.243*	-0.150Travel mode choice#			Car use frequency: every day	-2.181***	-1.523***	-1.530***Car use frequency: every week	-0.885***	-0.313	-0.822**Bicycle use frequency: every day	-0.336	 0.289	 0.522*Bicycle use frequency: every week	 0.360*	 0.187	 0.122Pedestrian paths use frequency: every day	 0.982**	 0.979***	 0.283Pedestrian paths use frequency: every week	 0.763	 0.968***	 0.309Urban travel frequency: every day	 0.747***	 0.802***	 0.799***Urban travel frequency: every week	 0.285	 1.039***	 0.527**Own financial perception			Cost of living (1: good)	 0.284	 0.690**	 0.354Cost of energy (1: good)	 0.391**	-0.076	 0.537**Household financial situation (1: good)	-0.094	 0.214	-0.497*Car ownership (1: yes)	-0.604**	-0.684**	-0.379Apartment/house ownership (1: yes)	-0.162	-0.714***	 0.005Politics and Environment			Road congestion issues (1: important)	 0.315	 0.011	 0.525**Air pollution issues (1: important)	-0.334	-0.300	-0.297Travel cost issues (1: important)	-0.123	 0.349	-0.250Lower public transport prices (1: important)	 0.188	 0.064	 0.207EU policies against poverty (1: important)	-0.261	-0.100	-0.389*Higher public transport quality (1: important)	 0.154	 0.468**	 0.399**Better walking facilities (1: important)	 0.233	-0.079	 0.614**Better cycling facilities (1: important)	-0.152	 0.054	-0.047Access time restrictions (1: important)	 0.097	-0.020	 0.021Car sharing incentives (1: important)	-0.144	-0.062	 0.171Urban traffic responsibles (1: citizens)	 0.499***	-0.406**	-0.075Notes: *p<0.10; **p<0.05; ***p<0.01     #Reference: less than once a weekResults show that the variety of factors have different roles in shaping travel behaviours in the three countries and for each gender; nevertheless, a cross-national analysis of sex differences in PEBs may be drawn.A high education level has a positive effect on PT usage for Dutch people; in Italy, women who are well-educated and have got a high-level job are about to use PT with a greater intensity than women either with a low education and low-level job, students or unemployed. This states the key role of education in environmental matters: well-educated people are, in general, more aware and concerned and, thus, more willing to engage in concrete environmental protection actions. Due to the lower availability of childcare services in Italy, which leads to major challenges in urban travelling [2], Italian women with kids appear less prone to use PT. Living in a big city has a positive influence on the probability of PT usage, as populous urban areas are usually characterised by shorter distances and more developed PT infrastructures. In each country, elderly male citizens are less likely to use PT than their younger counterparts, showing to be more addicted to private vehicles than the new generations, and confirming that the rate of people using multiple modes of transportation, rather than just the car, declines in later life stages.Men, in general, appear to be more prone to active and multimodal transport compared to women, especially combining bike and PT use. Among women, Dutch are the only ones combining PT use and cycling in daily life, apparently due to a stronger bicycle culture and better cycling facilities in the country. Using pedestrian paths on a daily basis also seems to be positively related to PT use. Frequent car users, on the other hand, are less likely to use PT. These outcomes confirm that public and active transport can be integrated, while a car-based mobility style does not give room for other means of transportation.Italians with a high socioeconomic status, proxied by home ownership and perceived household financial situation, are less likely to travel by PT if women, and more likely if men, maybe because women are usually travelling shorter distances to work than men, which does not make PT an attractive (e.g., fast, cheap) alternative to the car. People who own a personal car, as expected, are less likely to use PT, but not in the Netherlands, which appears to be more open to alternative transportation modes compared to the other countries.Dutch people who evaluate road congestion as an important urban problem act differently depending on their gender: while men who do so are significantly less likely to use PT services, women are more likely to use them. It looks like Dutch women care about urban problems more and try to solve them with their behaviour. This is furtherly explained by the fact that Dutch men considering air pollution a relevant urban problem are less likely to use PT as a sustainable solution. Dutch men who are concerned about travel costs, though, are more likely to move by PT. Even if costs are indeed a sensitive issue for mobility, only German male PT users seem to mind about ticket prices. Most PT users demand for a higher PT quality, tending to favour the development of policies that improve conditions for the transport modes they habitually use. In Italy, men who think that enhanced cycling facilities could be appropriate measures to improve urban travelling apparently use PT services with a lower frequency than men who do not, showing not to have a multimodal lifestyle. German and Italian women thinking that urban traffic responsibility is a matter of citizens themselves are more likely to use PT, and the same applies to Dutch men, showing concern for the quality of urban environment and trying to make it better.All these outcomes indicate that policies aimed at designing pro-environmental transport systems need to be adapted based on local context and gender.References1.	Buehler, R., Pucher, J., Gerike, R., Götschi, T.: Reducing car dependence in the heart of Europe: lessons from Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. Transp Rev 37(1), 4-28 (2017)2.	Castellano, R., Punzo, G., Rocca, A.: The generational perspective of gender gap in wages and education in southern Europe. Rev Soc Econ (2018) doi: 10.1080/00346764.2017.14235123.	European Commission: Attitudes of Europeans towards urban mobility. Special Eurobarometer 406 (2013) http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_406_en.pdf4.	European Commission: State of the art on alternative fuels transport systems in the European Union. Final Report. Expert Group on Future Transport Fuels. Brussels (2015)5.	Khreis, H., May, A.D., Nieuwenhuijsen, M. J.: Health impacts of urban transport policy measures: a guidance note for practice. J Transp Health 6, 209-227 (2017)6.	Owen, A.L., Videras, J.: Civic cooperation, pro-environment attitudes, and behavioral intentions. Ecol Econ 58(4), 814-829 (2006)7.	Redman, L., Friman, M., Gärling, T., Hartig, T.: Quality attributes of public transport that attract car users: A research review. Transp Policy 25, 119-127 (2013)8.	Steg, L., Vlek, C.: Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda. J Environ Psychol 29(3), 309-317 (2009)9.	^1	  Gennaro Punzo and Demetrio Panarello, University of Naples Parthenope, Department of Economic and Legal Studies, email: gennaro.punzo@uniparthenope.it; demetrio.panarello@uniparthenope.itRosalia Castellano, University of Naples Parthenope, Department of Management and Quantitative Studies, email: lia.castellano@uniparthenope.it^2	  The total number of observations is 3,329. Specifically, there are 1,391 individuals from Germany, 1,001 from Italy and 937 from the Netherlands. Post-stratification weights, based on a comparison for each sample with the respective universe, are properly accounted for.^3	  Standard errors are not included for sake of brevity; though, they are available upon request.

Understanding pro-environmental travel behaviours in Western Europe

Panarello D.

Archivio istituzionale della ricerca - Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna

https://ricerca.uniparthenope.it/bitstream/11367/71298/2/1180-3249-1-PB.doc

Understanding pro-environmental travel behaviours in Western Europe

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Archivio della ricerca - Università degli studi di Napoli "Parthenope"

Archivio istituzionale della ricerca - Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna

Understanding pro-environmental travel behaviours in Western Europe

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Archivio della ricerca - Università degli studi di Napoli &quot;Parthenope&quot;

Archivio istituzionale della ricerca - Alma Mater Studiorum Università di Bologna

Archivio della ricerca - Università degli studi di Napoli "Parthenope"