Explaining and Evaluating the Criteria of Comfort and Convenience in Urban Public Transport Trips: A Case Study of the 28th Bus Line of Isfahan Metropolis

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Associate Professor in architecture and urban planning faculty, art university of Isfahan

2 PhD student of urban planning at university of Tehran, urban planning lecturer at university of Tehran and Art university of Isfahan

3 Farinaz rikhtehgaran, Master of urban design, urban planning faculty, university of Tehran

Abstract

Research has shown that excessive tendency to use personal transportation can lead to catastrophic outcomes for a city and its citizens. Researchers and policy makers affirm that increasing the people’s tendency to use public transportation is the main solution in order to reduce the unfortunate results of personal transportation. In fact, comfort and convenience during daily urban trips is an important factor which encourages people to use public transportation. The main objectives of this study are recognizing and evaluating comfort and convenience in urban public transportation and identifying and measuring those criteria and indicators which represent comfort and convenience in urban public transportation. In line with the aforementioned objectives, first, the concepts of comfort and convenience have been explained. Next, both concepts are identified in urban public transportation. Then, a conceptual model is formulated based on 18 indicators explaining convenience and comfort in daily trips based on public transportation. The case under study was the 28th bus line of Isfahan metropolis. In order to evaluate the 18 indicators, F'ANP model was applied. The findings show that comfort and convenience in urban public transportation is influenced by five factors including ‘quality of services and facilities’, ‘passenger capacity and environmental beauty’, ‘efficiency of public transportation’, ‘effectiveness of public transportation’, and ‘safety and security’. In addition, based on the results of F'ANP model, ‘quality of air conditioner, heating and cooling facilities, ‘disabled persons facilities’, ‘cleanliness of station and bus environments’, ‘station facilities (shelter and seats)’ disturb comfort and convenience during trips in the bus line under investigation. Conversely, ‘the possibility of sitting during trips’, ‘beauty of trip environment’, ‘distance between stations and passengers’ points of departure’ and ‘distance between the bus stations in a bus line to those of other bus lines’  are the indicators which provide the highest extent of comfort and convenience for the passengers during public transportation trips.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

احمدوند، محمدعلی، 1382، بهداشت روانی، تهران، انتشارات پیام نور.
پناهی، علی احمد، 1392، راه‌کارهای ایجاد آرامش روان در زندگی فردی از منظر روایات، مجله معرفت، شماره 75.
تزار، هویدا و صفار زاده، محمود، 1387، نقش آسایش و راحتی سفر در افزایش تعداد مسافران سیستم حمل‌ونقل عمومی - مطالعه موردی شهر خرم، نشریه مطالعات مدیریت ترافیک، تابستان 1387 – شماره 9
درگاه فرهنگستان زبان و ادب فارسی: www.persianacademy.ir
دهخدا، علی‌اکبر، 1373، لغت‌نامه دهخدا، تألیف علی‌اکبر دهخدا. زیر نظر محمد معین و جعفر شهیدی. انتشارات دانشگاه تهران
زبردست، اسفندیار، 1393، کاربرد مدل F’ANP در شهرسازی. نشریه هنرهای زیبا-معماری و شهرسازی، سال 19، شماره 2، صص: 23-38.‎
زبردست، اسفندیار، 1388، جزوه درسی روش‌های برنامه‌ریزی منطقه‌ای دوره کارشناسی ارشد شهرسازی، دانشگاه تهران.
زیاری، کرامت الله و منوچهری میاندوآب، ایوب و محمود پور، صابر و ابراهیم پور، احد،1390، ارزیابی سامانه حمل‌ونقل عمومی (BRT) شهر تبریز با استفاده از رویکرد تحلیل عوامل استراتژیک (SWOT)، دو فصلنامه مدیریت شهری، شماره 27، بهار و تابستان، صص: 98-79
عابدی، محمدحامد و فاروقی، فرزین، 1392، رحیمی کاکه جوب، آرمان، سنجش کارایی سامانه حمل‌ونقل همگانی در شهر یزد، نشریه تحقیقات کاربردی علوم جغرافیایی، سال 13، شماره 30.
قدرتی، حسین و محمدیان، منیژه و محمد پور، احمد و افراسیابی، حسین، 1391، عوامل مرتبط با احساس آسایش سالمندان (مطالعه شهر سبزوار) مجله مطالعات اجتماعی ایران، سال 6، شماره 1.
قوامی، سید مرسل و کریمی، علی و مسگری، محمد سعدی،1390، ارزیابی خطوط اتوبوس‌رانی با استفاده از سامانه اطلاعات مکانی و تحلیل پوششی داده‌ها، مطالعه موردی خطوط اتوبوس‌رانی تهران. مهندسی حمل‌ونقل، سال 2، شماره 3، صص: 271-261.
معین، محمد، 1382، فرهنگ معین، تهران، انتشارات بی نا.
Hensher, David, Peter Stopher, and Philip Bullock, 2003, Service quality—developing: A service quality index in the provision of commercial bus contracts.Transportation Research a 37 (6), 499–517.
Holmgren, Johan, 2013, the efficiency of public transport operations–An evaluation using stochastic frontier analysis. Research in Transportation Economics 39, no. 1, 50-57.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/
Laurie, Buys and Evonne Miller, 2011, Conceptualising convenience: Transportation practices and perceptions of inner-urban high density residents in Brisbane, Australia, Transport Policy 18, no. 1, 289-297.
Ling Wanga, Linbo Li a, Bing Wua, Yufang Baia, 2013, Private Car Switched to Public Transit by Commuters, in Shanghai, China, 13th COTA International Conference of Transportation Professionals (CICTP 2013), Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 96, 1293 – 1303.
Litman, Todd, 2017, Valuing transit service quality improvements, Victoria Transport Policy Institute.
Litman, Todd, 2011, Safe travels: evaluating mobility management traffic safety impacts.
Ostir, Glenn V., Kyriakos S. Markides, Sandra A. Black, and James S. Goodwin, 2000, Emotional well‐being predicts subsequent functional independence and survival, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 48, no. 5, 473-478.
Phillips, Rhonda, John Karachepone, and Bruce Landis, 2001, Multi-modal quality of service project. Florida Department of Transportation.
Suh, Eunkook, Ed Diener, Shigehiro Oishi, and Harry C. Triandis, 1998, the shifting basis of life satisfaction judgments across cultures: Emotions versus norms, Journal of personality and social psychology 74, no. 2, 482.
Transit Capacity and Quality of Service, 2nd Edition, TCRP Report 100.
Lao, Y. and L. Liu (Transportation Research Board), 2009, PerformExecutive Committee, 2003, Transit Capacity and Quality of Service, 2nd Edition, TCRP Report 100.
Victoria Transport Policy Institute(VTPI), 2014, valuing transit service quality improvment Considering Comfort and Convenience In Transport Project Evaluation
Viton, Philip A, 1997, Technical efficiency in multi-mode bus transit: A production frontier analysis, Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 31, no. 1, 23-39.
Yaliniz, Polat, Safak Bilgic, Yasar Vitosoglu, and Cantekin Turan, 2011, Evaluation of urban public transportation efficiency in Kutahya, Turkey, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 20, 885-895.
Zebardast, Esfandiar, 2013, constructing a social vulnerability index to earthquake hazards using a hybrid factor analysis and analytic network process (F’ANP) model, Natural hazards 65, no. 3, 1331-1359.

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 11 January 2018
  • Revise Date: 06 March 2018
  • Accept Date: 14 June 2018

Share

How to cite

Statistics