Budapest Transport Closely Held Corporation
Customer satisfaction & customer relationship management at BKV in Budapest
April 17, 2008
Actualities and forecast of modalsplit and motorization 500
Automobile/1000 inhabitants
Legend: Budapest region
370
400
336
individual public transport
20
80% 70% 60% 50% 40%
80
30% 20%
33
67
1995
397
440 420
270 227
200 175 100
Year 1995
2000
40
43
46
48
60
57
54
52
2000
2005
2010
2015
10% 0% 1990
425
316
234
0 1990
100% 90%
360
295 300
401
2005
2010
2013
2015
BKV’s network and statistics 9 Number of passengers carried: 1.298 billion / year • bus 41.3% • tram 26.3% • metro and underground 22.0% • Trolley bus 5.9% • suburban railway 4.5%
9 Inhabitants: 1,863,000 people 9 Fare revenues: 45.97 billion HUF ~ 181,466,000 euro
9 Outputs: 5.44 billion passengerkm / year 21.3 billion seatkm / year
BKV’s network and statistics 9 Service in the 28 surrounding settlements 9 Length of total network: 2283.35 km • 233 bus lines • 28 tram lines • 14 trolleybus lines • 3 metro lines • 4 suburban railway lines
9 Average circulation speed: 16.5 km/h 9 Number of stops: 4,924 9 Total number of headcount: 12,679
Household surveying area
164 zones in Budapest 24 surrounding settlements served by BKV Together 50,627 households
Sampling 50 000 households in Budapest and its surrounding 1 dot = 5 households
Survey method: CAPI - Computer Aided Personal Interview
Number of households
Within Budapest
Outside Budapest
Weekdays
30,000
4.0%
7,800
6.5%
Weekends
7,500
1.0%
3,700
3.1%
Specific number of trips according to the age and the vehicle ownership Average in Budapest: 2,26
Legend Number of cars in the household: 0 1 >1 together
Average journey distance Average journey distance: Budapest: 6,87 kms/journey Whole surveying area: 7,01 kms/journey
Mobility characteristic Mobility is greater • • • • • •
in Budapest than in the surroundings; in the city, than in the suburban region; in households with car; in active population; among young people (19-39 years old); people using mobile phone or internet.
Mobility doesn’t closely depend on incomes Summary: a competitive city with competitive people claims more mobility.
Alltogether
30
Suburban together
40
S-E Pest
40
N-E Pest
41
S-W Buda
N-W Buda
62
Budapest
54
XXIII.
XXII.
54
XXI.
54 56
XX.
58
XIX.
XVIII.
56
XVII.
50
XVI.
57
XV.
65
XIV.
67
XIII.
57
XII.
XI.
65
X.
71
IX.
79
VIII.
79
VII.
80
VI.
V.
IV.
58
III.
60
II.
70
I.
%
Modal split (at weekdays)
90
78 73 69 65 61 58
51
46 38
32 35
29
20
10
0
Factors affecting modal split • Modal split is 61-39% in Budapest on weekdays • On weekends and by the town border crossing movements public transport rate is under 50% => increased competition • 50-70% of passengers have chance to choose between transport modes => competition is undecided, balance between transport modes • Inelasticity of disclaiming of car using
Passenger circulation figure I. weekdays
Passenger/day/2 directions
weekends
Passenger circulation figure II.
Scale: Passengers/day/2 directions
Procession of journeys schedule
Legend Budapest surroundings
To what extent are you satisfied with BKV regarding the following elements of services? 1. keeping the timetable 2. calculatability of journey times 3. crowde dne s s in ve hicle s 4. number of neccessary transfers 5. choice of tickets & passes
11. cle anline s s of ve hicle s & s tops 12. safety in vehicles & stops 13. staff behaviour 14. level of passenger information 15. image of BKV
6. number of BKV-lines 7. frequency 8. price of tickets & passes 9. discounts 10. possibilities to buy a ticket
car driver
other traveller
Budapest 4 3,5
satisfaction
3 2,5 2 1,5 1 0,5 0 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Under which circumstances would you be ready to use PT instead of car?
Budapest, szgk. better passenger information
modern vehicles
much cheaper PT
faster PT
less transfer
more frequent PT
more metro lines
better comfort
0,00
5,00
10,00
15,00
20,00
25,00
%
30,00
35,00
40,00
45,00
How would you buy your season ticket?
Legend current system is good transfer bank automat SMS don’t have season ticket
What do you mean about fare dodgers?
Try with this!
Why do you mostly use car? (as driver)
other
100%
80%
have to move a lot 60%
faster 40%
more comfortable 20%
becouse of the job
0% Buda
Pest
N-W Buda district
S-W Buda district
N-E Pest district
S-E Pest district
Would you mind using P+R facilities?
Results and conclusions • Mostly home-based trips (85%) => compliance of public transportation depends on reaching residential zones • 16% of passengers rightly traveling free of charge • P+R system has big reserve • Mostly proper with current ticket office system (47%) • Needs for modern systems like SMS and transfer • Highly tolerating fare dodgers
‘TravelSmart’ in Budapest • Pilot project initiated by BKV, focus on PT • Project title: Choose public transport! • Sept 2007 – Febr 2008 • Based on TravelSmart experience in WesternEurope (soft measures, communication) • Sample areas of recent PT developments • 2000 households contacted. Each is car owner! • Finally, 241 households took part in the whole process – Regular, detailed notes on all actual PT trips were required during the research period! – 342 travelling diaries
‘TravelSmart’ in Budapest • General aims: less car transport, more PT, modal shift on individual level • Direct aims – to give information on PT services to potential users – to get information on attitudes – to get feedback on recent PT developments
• Motivation package: leaflet, gifts, timetables of local lines, travelling diary, 20 single tickets free (mostly appreciated) • Interviews in each participant household: – face to face: 1st, 3rd – by phone: 2nd • Personal communication was highly acknowledged by the participants
Results – Attitudes • Satisfaction: Metro, suburban rail, tram • The biggest advantages of PT – 1st: no worry about parking – 2nd: you can listen to sg else • Who refused to participate: They don’t see relationship between number of cars and congested transport… • Car-owners think that PT promotion is an intervention to their private life! • Night PT services highly ranked
Results - Attitudes Ha az ember BKV-val utazik, legalább nem kell aggódnia a parkolás
80
If you use PT you don’t need miatt. to worry about parking az ember BKV-val közlekedik, akkor utazás közben tud másra is If you Ha use PT you can listen to sg else during the journey figyelni. If more people used PT it would bring congestion Ha többen használnák a BKV-t, kevesebb lenneless a dugó, és kevésbé and károsítanánk less harmful effects on environment a környezetet. Ha már egyszer dugóban jobb kocsiban ülni, mint If therekell is állni, already a congestion, thenösszezsúfolódva. it is better to sit in a car másokkal Riding bike in Bp is a madness Budapesten biciklivel közlekedni őrültség. Buying PT ticket/pass is still cheaper Még mindig olcsóbb a BKV jegyet, bérletet megvásárolni, mint egy than maintaining a car kocsit fenntartani. hogythat szinte minden autóbansits csakin egy-egy It isRossz bad látni, to see only 1 person eachember car. utazik. you meg, havehogy an bizonyos important job Aki fontos pozíciót tölt be, nemIfteheti helyekre you can’t use PT e.g. to reach a meeting place (pl. tárgyalásra) BKV-val PT has been attractive in Bp since lowisfloor vehicles Miótamore új, tisztább, alacsonypadlós járművek közlekednek (pl. have been introduced Volvo busz,) vonzóbb a közösségi közlekedés Budapesten. Az autó nemcsak közlekedési eszköz, hanem az ember társadalmi Car is not only a transport mode, it represents your place in the society. rangját is mutatja. Nowadays only csak those people PT who a Manapság az ül BKV-ra, use akinek nem futjacan’t autóra,afford benzinre. car & fuel Budapesten még ma is sokkal jobb a közösségi közlekedés, mint Bp still has a better PTeurópai than many European cities. sok más városban.
64
Inkább egyetért Rather agree
17
27
31
17
27
15
39
18 20%
Inkább nem ért egyet Rather disagree
40%
7
13
6
15
5 5 11
33
23 18
10
13
26
19
4
22
17
24
42
10
15
27
36
9
12
27
38
12
7
27
41
16
5 22
29
47
20
211
27
57
0% Teljesen Fully egyetért agree
16
2
43
2
26 60%
Egyáltalán ért egyet Fullynem disagree
29 80%
100% No answer
nt/nv Don’t know
Results – Willingness to change • Yes, if … – More P+R – Price proportional to journey length – Less transfer is needed from one PT line to another – Better frequency of PT services
rather hard measures…
Results – Willingness to change If there will be P+R more P&R ha több parkoló lenne If youutazásokra shouldkevesebbet pay less forfizetni, a shorter journey Ha a rövidebb kellene mint a hosszabbakra.
42
If you needed less transfer between ha kevesebbszer kellene lines átszállni
42
If services had a betterjárnának frequency ha gyakrabban a járatok
40
Ifhathere will abe less crowd onközlekedési PT vehicles kisebb lenne zsúfoltság a közösségi járatokon PT will gyorsabb be faster ha a közösségiIfközlekedés lenne ha súlyosabbá válnának amore közúti forgalmi dugók If congestions will become serious
27
a járművek kényelmesebbek lennének If vehicleshawill be more comfortable
26 24
24
ha a közlekedési csomópontok tisztábbak, rendezettebbek lennének If interchanges will be cleaner
23
28
14 0%
Would use PT surely more biztosan gyakrabban often
valószínűleg Likelygyakrabban more often
10%
23
33
3
27
32
3
26
41
3
31
37
5
40
4
3
46 7
48
6
64
16 20%
4
48
26
19
ha közösségi közlekedés elfogadottabb lenne If aPT will be bettertársadalmilag accepted generally
3
29
ha a közlekedési csomópontokwill akadálymentesítve lennének If interchanges be barrier-free
ha drágulna a parkolás If parking will be more expensive
31
23
30
4
36
18
38
5
31
20
45
30%
40%
50%
ez It nem számítana matter doesn’t
60%
70%
80%
90%
No answer Don’t know
nt/nv
100%
Future target groups • Who would mostly accept and take part in such a project: – Women, especially young mothers – Middle-aged couples, families – Middle-class people • Students about getting the driving licence but still having a student pass
Follow up • In this research we found: people want rather hard measures • Potential impacts of better communication is still to be measured • Participants made some suggestions and wait for the realization. If they won’t see progress, they will feel that this project was useless! • How to take into account? – Advanced methodology would be helpful for the optimal use of feedbacks
Follow up • A next project could … – Be longer – Have a bigger sample – Extend the geographical area – Involve other transport modes, stakeholders, institutions – Put more emphasis on environmental issues and sustainability – Have more and refined questions whether individual modal shift could be achieved by soft measures only
Budapest Transport Closely Held Corporation
Thank you for your attention!
