Template:Featured content/test cases: Difference between revisions

From Transport Knowledge Wiki
← Older editNewer edit →
VisualWikitext
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 6: Line 6:
| image              = [[File:active travel.jpg|200px|link=Active travel|alt=In front of a convenience store are two cyclists passing a parklet with seating.]]
| image              = [[File:active travel.jpg|200px|link=Active travel|alt=In front of a convenience store are two cyclists passing a parklet with seating.]]
| metadata          = {{publisher link|Living Streets}} {{keyword link|Active travel}} {{keyword link|Walking}} {{keyword link|Wheeling}} {{keyword link|Autonomous vehicles}} {{location link|Milton Keynes}} {{location link|Barnsley}} {{location link|Sunderland}} {{location link|Sheffield}} {{location link|Reading}} {{location link|Bristol}} {{location link|Leeds}} {{location link|Cambridge}} {{location link|Pittsburg}} {{location link|Toronto}} {{location link|Chicago}} {{location link|Los Angeles}}
| metadata          = {{publisher link|Living Streets}} {{keyword link|Active travel}} {{keyword link|Walking}} {{keyword link|Wheeling}} {{keyword link|Autonomous vehicles}} {{location link|Milton Keynes}} {{location link|Barnsley}} {{location link|Sunderland}} {{location link|Sheffield}} {{location link|Reading}} {{location link|Bristol}} {{location link|Leeds}} {{location link|Cambridge}} {{location link|Pittsburg}} {{location link|Toronto}} {{location link|Chicago}} {{location link|Los Angeles}}
}}
{{break}}
{{featured content
| publication_symbol = {{Journal article symbol}}
| title              = [[Benefits and harms of DRT in suburban areas]]
| date              = June 2026‎
| summary            = Since the rebirth of demand-responsive transit (DRT) after 2010 many failed and discontinued initiatives have been observed. The issues range from inadequate technology, ill-defined spatial and temporal conditions, to missing knowledge of user preferences, low ridership, and of course funding, since many trials are ceased once the subsidy is stopped. In this paper, we explore the use and effects of an app-based DRT in a suburban environment based on the data collected from users and non-users of a newly launched service in Austria. The results indicate that the service performs well as a feeder mode for rail transportation with positive user reviews. However, there are concerns about a limited operating area, too short operating hours and low pooling effects (occupancy rates). The Hybrid Choice model indicates that both the frequency of car use and the possession of a public transit pass have a significant effect on the frequency of DRT use. However, this behavior is independent of latent attitudes toward different modes of transportation. Also, the service operates without a surcharge for annual pass holders, which leads to side effects such as shifting from active modes to DRT, and generating entirely new trips. Based on respondents' statements regarding alternative means of transport they would have used if DRT had not existed, we observe that DRT trips generate substantially more motorized traffic than if the service did not exist. This study provides policy recommendations aimed at increasing ridership and minimizing unintended side effects.
| image              = [[File:active travel.jpg|200px|link=Active travel|alt=In front of a convenience store are two cyclists passing a parklet with seating.]]
| metadata          = {{keyword link|Shared mobility}}‎ {{Keyword link|Traffic‎}} {{location link|Austria}}
}}
}}

Revision as of 13:55, 8 July 2026

Webpage Delivery Robots 29 June 2026‎
In front of a convenience store are two cyclists passing a parklet with seating. "Delivery robots raise significant concerns for pedestrians. By occupying pavement space, they add congestion and clutter to the pavements, increasing competition for pavement space that is already a major issue in the UK – for example micromobility modes, electric vehicle charging points and pavement parking. This disproportionately affects disabled people (particularly wheelchair users and visually impaired people), older pedestrians and adults with prams and pushchairs. There are also unresolved questions about liability when incidents occur, as well as privacy concerns linked to the use of cameras in public space."
Publisher Living Streets (8)‎ Keyword Active travel (90) Keyword Walking (86) Keyword Wheeling (40) Keyword Autonomous vehicles (4) Location Milton Keynes (1) Location Barnsley (1) Location Sunderland (1) Location Sheffield (5) Location Reading (1) Location Bristol (6) Location Leeds (9) Location Cambridge (4) Location Pittsburg (1) Location Toronto (2) Location Chicago (2) Location Los Angeles (2)
Journal article Benefits and harms of DRT in suburban areas June 2026‎
In front of a convenience store are two cyclists passing a parklet with seating. Since the rebirth of demand-responsive transit (DRT) after 2010 many failed and discontinued initiatives have been observed. The issues range from inadequate technology, ill-defined spatial and temporal conditions, to missing knowledge of user preferences, low ridership, and of course funding, since many trials are ceased once the subsidy is stopped. In this paper, we explore the use and effects of an app-based DRT in a suburban environment based on the data collected from users and non-users of a newly launched service in Austria. The results indicate that the service performs well as a feeder mode for rail transportation with positive user reviews. However, there are concerns about a limited operating area, too short operating hours and low pooling effects (occupancy rates). The Hybrid Choice model indicates that both the frequency of car use and the possession of a public transit pass have a significant effect on the frequency of DRT use. However, this behavior is independent of latent attitudes toward different modes of transportation. Also, the service operates without a surcharge for annual pass holders, which leads to side effects such as shifting from active modes to DRT, and generating entirely new trips. Based on respondents' statements regarding alternative means of transport they would have used if DRT had not existed, we observe that DRT trips generate substantially more motorized traffic than if the service did not exist. This study provides policy recommendations aimed at increasing ridership and minimizing unintended side effects.
Keyword Shared mobility (2)‎ Keyword Traffic‎ (44) Location Austria (2)
Retrieved from "https://transportknowledge.net/index.php?title=Template:Featured_content/test_cases&oldid=11042"