Download
1 / 21
210 likes | 287 Vues
How accessible was the Swedish public transport system in 2010? Helena Svensson, Ph D in public transport Vectura Consulting, Sweden Lund University, Sweden. Background. Already in 1979 in Swedish public transport law Decisions in the year 2000 Fully accessible in 2010
E N D
How accessible was the Swedish public transport system in 2010?Helena Svensson, Ph D in public transportVectura Consulting, SwedenLund University, Sweden
Background • Already in 1979 in Swedish public transport law • Decisions in the year 2000 Fully accessible in 2010 What is included when we talk about the public transport system?
What is included when we talk about the public transport system?
What is included when we talk about the public transport system?
What is included when we talk about the public transport system?
What is included when we talk about the public transport system?
What is included when we talk about the public transport system?
What is included when we talk about the public transport system?
The purpose of this study was to review how accessible the public transport system in Sweden was in the year 2010, from the perspective of the transport providers and not from people using the system.
Measuring accessibility of public transport • Inventories/assessments by trained persons - Predefined factors for checking accessibility - Time consuming (e.g. bus stops, stations) • Ask travellers using e.g. questionnaires - Who and when, what functional limitations - Subjective view from relevant people, usability - Time consuming • Ask transport providers - Fairly quick and easy - Trustful data, accessibility
Method used • Data collected from the Regional Public Transport Authorities in Sweden* to report on the status in their region. • All 24 PT authorities in Sweden were included. • A questionnaire was sent out in advance. • Data was mainly collected through telephone interviews. • Partial drop-outs on some questions, due to difficulties reporting the correct data. • Data was collected about: the internal organisation, training/awareness, vehicles, bus stops/stations, information, other services and co-operation with key stakeholders.
Results – what the authorities reported 23 of 24 authorities answered that their drivers have taken an awareness course (all drivers in many cases).
Results – buses 100% of the buses Among other authorities, parts of their vehicle (50%) are adopted.
Results – Rail cars Some authorities reported that a majority of the rail cars were accessible regarding levelled entrances, wheelchair seats and automatic announcement. A couple of the authorities reported that all their rail cars were accessible by including the above mentioned features.
Results – stops, stations and information • 20 PT authorities have been involved in improving their bus stops. • Between 5 and 100% of the bus stops were accessible. • More bus stops have been improved in cities compared to outside cities. • 14 PT authorities have design guidelines for their bus stops. • Difficult to collect data about stations; improvements which have been implemented are, e.g. tactile surfaces, ticketing machines and removed barriers. • A majority of the PT authorities (19) have worked towards more accessible information.
Discussion – Method for data collection • Deficiencies with this method - Difficulties to obtain the required data - All areas are not the authorities’ responsibility • Is this the true picture, or the providers opinion Accessibility is an objective concept, based on rules and regulations. Usability is the subjective view from individuals and can not be measured with this method.
Discussion – Results • To obtain a fully accessible public transport system takes time. • Not only time, but money, political will at all levels, knowledgeable people and interest from all relevant stakeholders. • Some parts of the system are easier to make accessible than others, but we must take “the whole travel chain” into account. • Public transport also include many dynamic factors, which can vary from time to time. These are difficult to measure but as important as other factors for the accessibility of the entire system.
Conclusions and lessons learned • Measuring methods used will affect the results and the measured level of accessibility will probably differ depending on which method is used. • Yes it is more accessible in Sweden now, but we did not reach the goal with a fully accessible public transport system in 2010. We must continue with our efforts!
