Does a high level of multimodality mean less car use? An exploration of multimodality trends in England

35Citations
Citations of this article
79Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Some existing studies have suggested that a higher level of multimodality—the use of more than one transport mode within a given period of time—may be desirable to achieve societies less dependent on cars. The aim of this study was to investigate the trends in individual multimodality in England. In addition, we explored whether these trends were homogenous, i.e. similar between socio-economic characteristics, and whether changes in multimodality corresponded with changes in car use and the use of other transport modes. Our analyses showed that in contrast to reported trends in existing research, the level of multimodality in England decreased between 1995 and 2015. These trends stratified by income were diverging, which may imply that inequality in transport opportunities may be increasing. In contrast, the trends for age and gender were converging. In addition, we found that the car mode share remained fairly stable and absolute car use decreased since 2004, whilst multimodality decreased. This suggests that there is no necessary relationship between aggregate levels of car use and the average individual level of multimodality. Moreover, our analyses showed that these trends were very similarly independent of which indicator was applied. This indicates that for analysing trends in multimodality, the choice of indicator may not be that important, and indicators that are elementary to calculate and easy to interpret, e.g. number of modes used, highlight trends that are highly consistent with more sophisticated metrics. This paper finishes with a discussion of the implications of these findings.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Heinen, E., & Mattioli, G. (2019). Does a high level of multimodality mean less car use? An exploration of multimodality trends in England. Transportation, 46(4), 1093–1126. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-017-9810-2

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free