Innovation needed to drive public transport usage

While applauding governments for encouraging people onto public transport through incentives, an industry peak body says deterrents are also needed.

A new report from the Public Transport Association of Australia New Zealand examines how the sector can move beyond the post-Covid recovery phase and focus on driving public transport growth into the future.

As well as “carrot” polices – such as Queensland’s 50 cent fares initiative – the authors of the PTAANZ report say: “Looking ahead, there are opportunities to think beyond the ‘carrots’ which make public transport more attractive and consider the ‘sticks’ which can be used to actively discourage the use of private vehicles – particularly in congested cities.”

The report – Mobility Beyond the Pandemic – points to experiences overseas, such as initiatives in London to disincentivise car use in the capital. These include a congestion charge and the introduction of the Ultra Low Emission Zone in which vehicles that do not meet emissions standards must pay a daily charge to drive within the zone.

Mark Streeting

“London’s success in increasing public transport mode share to 65% is largely attributed to progressive measures to discourage private car use. Initiatives such as ULEZ can encourage active transport, improve air quality and reduce congestion, meaning public transport services become faster and more reliable and cities more liveable,” PTAANZ vice-president Mark Streeting told Government News.

“This is also being explored in Australia and New Zealand, including congested parts of Sydney such as the CBD, Bondi Junction and Chatswood, where Transport for NSW manages the parking space levy. In Auckland, work is underway to investigate time-of-use charging to reduce peak period congestion and travel times. It will be interesting to see the impact of these policy interventions in our region.”

As the authors of the PTAANZ note, Covid drastically impacted public transport usage. “Initially, sharp declines in public transport patronage were observed, reflecting government-imposed lockdowns and mobility restrictions. Parallel to government-imposed restrictions, the viral transmission risks associated with public transport and aversion to crowding limited the initial rate of reuptake.”

This, the authors add, locked in “behavioural change” towards private transport.

However, the report says rates of public transport usage post-Covid have returned to more or less pre-pandemic levels across the region. “Many jurisdictions are largely back to, or exceeding 2019 patronage levels,” say the report’s authors.

Nevertheless, “more needs to be done” to support growth in public transport usage and reduce carbon emissions in Australian and New Zealand cities, they add.

Among the strategies suggested:

  • increase public transport frequency, coverage and network integration
  • expand dedicated busway infrastructure
  • build awareness of the network’s capabilities for a wider range of trips
  • match services to meet new demands.

But, as the authors conclude, “with a natural limit to the extent we can drive the attractiveness of public transport, we must increasingly focus on the ‘sticks’, specifically how we can directly disincentivise private car use as a means of driving mode shift to public transport … While the efforts of public transport authorities to date have delivered impressive results, we clearly need more to support growth in public transport usage and mode share in Australian and New Zealand cities.”

Comment below to have your say on this story.

If you have a news story or tip-off, get in touch at editorial@governmentnews.com.au.  

Sign up to the Government News newsletter

2 thoughts on “Innovation needed to drive public transport usage

  1. Please, no more sticks.
    We already know worsening congestion invites more road tolls.
    A product of fuelling growth without enabling enough car-alternative transport.
    In busy cities, big new transport infrastructure (urban motorways, railways, light rail and busways too) accelerates growth. Historically demonstrated.
    Taxpayers’ money would be better spent on vastly better bus services.
    (5–10-minute services, add more routes across entire cities, off-lane bus stops)
    That can reduce traffic and free up traffic flow, sooner rather than later.
    Little new infrastructure required.
    And growth can be shifted to other regional towns and cities, by upgrading their road, rail and air links.
    Obvious alternatives, there for the taking.
    John Morandini, Sydney

  2. Having lived in London and other cities with strong public transport usage, I can only point out that they design their transport systems and policies to support “Whole of Life” usage whereas Sydney transport seems to be mostly about commuter support back and forth to the CBD.

    As transport consultants have pointed out, services after 5pm or on weekends between recreational zones are nearly non-existent.

    In addition, Sydney Public transport vehicles and policies are not conducive to going anywhere with a lot of shopping, a bicycle or a pet. Either the vehicle interior space does not support them (shopping, bicycles) or the policies prevent them (pets).

    I miss being able to take my dog all over a city for outings using only public transport services. I can’t even take my dogs or cats to the vet during an emergency without a car. If I need to do any major shopping trips outside of my local suburb, I need a car.

    I’ve attended a number of public workshops on Sydney urban design and transport over the years where the above matters are always raised, yet they seem to be permanent blind spots for our planners and policy makers.

Leave a comment:

Your email address will not be published. All fields are required