Modal share
A modal share (also called mode split, mode-share, or modal split) is the percentage of travelers using a particular type of transportation or number of trips using said type.[1] In freight transportation, this may be measured in mass.
Modal share is an important component in developing sustainable transport within a city or region. In recent years, many cities have set modal share targets for balanced and sustainable transport modes, particularly 30% of non-motorized (cycling and walking) and 30% of public transport. These goals reflect a desire for a modal shift, or a change between modes, and usually encompasses an increase in the proportion of trips made using sustainable modes.[2]
Comparability of data
Modal share data is usually obtained by travel surveys, which are often conducted by local governments, using different methodologies. Sampling and interviewing techniques, definitions, the extent of geographical areas and other methodological differences can influence comparability. Most typical surveys refer to the main mode of transport used during trips to work.[3]
Modal split of journeys to work
The following tables present the modal split of journeys to work.
Cities with over 1,000,000 inhabitants
| City | walking | cycling | public transport | private motor vehicle | year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Adelaide | 3% | 1% | 10% | 86% | 2006 |
 Auckland | 3% | 1% | 6% | 89% | 2009-2012 [4] |
 Barcelona | 40% | 2% | 33% | 25% | 2012[5] |
 Beijing | 21% | 32% | 26% | 21% | 2005/2011[5] |
 Berlin | 30% | 13% | 26% | 31% | 2008 |
| Brisbane | 4% | 1% | 14% | 81% | 2006 |
.svg.png){kind=small} Brussels | 25% | 2.5% | 28% | 43% | 2010[6] |
 Bogota | 15% | 2% | 64% | 19% | 2008[5] |
 Boston | 14% | 2% | 35% | 45% | 2009 |
 Budapest | 22% | 2% | 30% | 46% | 2004 |
| Chicago | 6% | 1% | 27% | 61% | 2009 |
| Dallas | 2% | 0% | 4% | 89% | 2009 |
 Daejeon | 26% | 2% | 28% | 44% | 2012[7] |
 Delhi | 21% | 12% | 48% | 19% | 2008/2011[5] |
| Hamburg | 28% | 12% | 18% | 42% | 2008[8] |
| Houston | 2% | 0% | 4% | 88% | 2009 |
| Indianapolis | 2% | 1% | 2% | 92% | 2009 |
| Las Vegas | 3% | 0% | 3% | 89% | 2009 |
 London | 21% | 2% | 44% | 34% | 2011[9] |
| Los Angeles | 3% | 1% | 11% | 78% | 2009 |
| Madrid | 36% | 0% | 34% | 30% | 2006[5] |
| Melbourne | 4% | 2% | 14% | 80% | 2012 |
| Mumbai | 27% | 6% | 52% | 15% | 2008/2011[5] |
| Munich | 28% | 17% | 21% | 37% | 2011 |
| New York City | 10% | 1% | 55% | 29% | 2009 |
 Osaka | 27% | 0% | 34% | 39% | 2000[5] |
 Paris | 61% | 3% | 27% | 9% | 2010[10] |
| Perth | 3% | 1% | 10% | 86% | 2006 |
| Philadelphia | 9% | 2% | 25% | 60% | 2009 |
| Phoenix | 2% | 1% | 3% | 88% | 2009 |
| Portland | 6% | 6% | 12% | 70% | 2009 |
 Prague | 23% | 1% | 43% | 33% | 2009[11] |
 Rome | 7% | 0% | 24% | 68% | 2001 |
| San Antonio | 2% | 0% | 3% | 90% | 2009 |
| San Diego | 3% | 1% | 4% | 85% | 2009 |
| San Francisco | 10% | 3% | 32% | 46% | 2009 |
| San Jose | 2% | 1% | 3% | 89% | 2009 |
| Seattle | 8% | 3% | 20% | 63% | 2009 |
| Shanghai | 27% | 20% | 33% | 20% | 2009/2011[5] |
 Singapore | 22% | 1% | 44% | 33% | 2011[5] |
| Sydney | 5% | 1% | 21% | 74% | 2006 |
 Taipei | 15% | 4% | 33% | 48% | 2009/2010[5] |
| Tokyo | 23% | 14% | 51% | 12% | 2008/2009[5] |
 Toronto | 7% | 2% | 34% | 56% | 2006[12] |
 Vienna | 28% | 6% | 39% | 27% | 2012[13] |
 Warsaw | 5% | 1% | 60% | 34% | 2009[14] |
| Washington, D.C. | 11% | 2% | 37% | 43% | 2009 |
Cities with over 250,000 inhabitants
| City | walking | cycling | public transport | private motor vehicle | year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Aarhus | 7% | 27% | 19% | 43% | 2004 |
| Alicante | 18% | 0% | 13% | 69% | 2004 |
 Amsterdam | 4% | 38% | 30% | 28% | 2010 |
| Bari | 13% | 1% | 14% | 72% | 2001 |
 Bern | 11% | 11% | 54% | 24% | 2001 |
| Bilbao | 23% | 0% | 34% | 43% | 2004 |
| Birmingham | 1% | 1% | 25% | 66% | 2001 |
| Bologna | 8% | 4% | 21% | 67% | 2001 |
| Bonn | 9% | 13% | 21% | 57% | 2004 |
 Bratislava | 4% | 0% | 70% | 26% | 2004 |
| Bremen | 7% | 19% | 24% | 50% | 2004 |
| Bristol | 19% | 8% | 12% | 55% | 2011 [15] |
| Canberra | 5% | 2% | 8% | 85% | 2006 |
| Christchurch | 6% | 8% | 9% | 78% | 2009-2012 [4] |
| Cologne | 8% | 9% | 27% | 56% | 2004 |
| Copenhagen | 10% | 26% | 36% | 28% | 2012 |
| Córdoba | 18% | 1% | 10% | 71% | 2004 |
| Dortmund | 7% | 3% | 23% | 67% | 2004 |
| Dresden | 24% | 17% | 21% | 38% | 2008 |
| Düsseldorf | 11% | 5% | 31% | 53% | 2004 |
| Eindhoven | 3% | 24% | 8% | 65% | 2004 |
| Essen | 9% | 2% | 20% | 69% | 2004 |
| Florence | 8% | 4% | 21% | 69% | 2001 |
| Frankfurt | 11% | 7% | 39% | 43% | 2004 |
| Freiburg im Breisgau | 11% | 13% | 12% | 63% | 2004 |
| Gijón | 24% | 0% | 17% | 59% | 2004 |
 Göteborg | 12% | 14% | 21% | 52% | 2004 |
| Hanover | 9% | 13% | 29% | 49% | 2004 |
 Helsinki | 12% | 6% | 40% | 41% | 2004 |
| Las Palmas | 12% | 0% | 24% | 64% | 2004 |
 Lisbon | 10% | 0% | 46% | 40% | 2001 |
| Málaga | 12% | 0% | 11% | 77% | 2004 |
| Malmö | 6% | 25% | 18% | 51% | 2011 |
| Murcia | 18% | 1% | 7% | 74% | 2004 |
| Naples | 13% | 0% | 26% | 60% | 2001 |
| Nuremberg | 11% | 7% | 30% | 52% | 2004 |
| Ottawa | 10% | 2% | 14% | 72% | 2011 |
| Palermo | 12% | 1% | 9% | 78% | 2001 |
| Rotterdam | 5% | 14% | 25% | 56% | 2004 |
| Stockholm | 15% | 7% | 43% | 33% | 2004 |
| The Hague | 5% | 22% | 30% | 43% | 2004 |
| Seville | 13% | 6% | 15% | 64% | 2012 |
| Stuttgart | 13% | 4% | 32% | 51% | 2004 |
 Tallinn | 16% | 0% | 50% | 34% | 2004 |
| Turin | 12% | 3% | 5% | 79% | 2004 |
| Utrecht | 3% | 21% | 25% | 51% | 2004 |
| Valencia | 16% | 1% | 21% | 62% | 2004 |
| Valladolid | 22% | 1% | 20% | 57% | 2004 |
| Vigo | 19% | 0% | 13% | 68% | 2004 |
 Vilnius | 36% | 0% | 26% | 38% | 2011[16] |
| Wellington | 11% | 3% | 19% | 65% | 2009-2012[4] |
| Zaragoza | 17% | 0% | 29% | 54% | 2004 |
| Zürich | 8% | 5% | 63% | 25% | 2001 |
Notes: European data is based on the Urban Audit,[17] US data is based on the Census’ American Community Survey from 2009,[18] Australian data is based on main method of transport to work as recorded by the ABS Census.[19]
Modal share targets
The Charter of Brussels, signed by 36 cities including Brussels, Ghent, Milan, Munich, Seville, Edinburgh, Toulouse, Bordeaux, Gdansk, and Timisoara, commits the signatories to achieve at least 15% of bicycling modal share by 2020, and calls upon European institutions to do likewise.[20]
See also
- Intermodal passenger transport
- Mode choice (the decisions that determine Modal share, especially in traffic analysis and forecasting)
- Mode of transport
- Rail usage statistics by country
External links
References
- ↑ Glossary (Engineering Services - Transportation, City of Vancouver website. Accessed 2009-06-04.)
- ↑ http://www.ramblers.org.uk/Walking/policy/transport/transportleisure
- ↑ Singapore Land and Transport Authority: Journeys, issue 7, November 2011
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 5.10 Passenger Transport Mode Shares in World Cities
- ↑ Camille Thiry (ed.). "Cahiers de l’Observatoire de la mobilité de la Région de Bruxelles-Capitale: Les pratiques de déplacement à Bruxelles" (in French). Bruxelles mobilité. p. 49. Retrieved 25 November 2013.
- ↑ [KOTI, "2013 National Trasnportation DB Report" 2013], retrieved 2013-12-31
- ↑ Page 7 in Infas: Mobilität im Großraum Hamburg
- ↑ Transport for London: "Travel in London" Report 5, 2012
- ↑ Enquête Globale Transport 2010, retrieved 2012-09-19
- ↑ The yearbook of transportation Prague 2009, page 5, retrieved 2011-03-23
- ↑ City of Toronto, retrieved 29 April 2012
- ↑ , (German) retrieved 2013-01-22
- ↑ , (English) retrieved 2012-04-06
- ↑
- ↑ Naujų transporto rūšių diegimo Vilniaus mieste specialusis planas, retrieved 2013-07-03
- ↑ Urban Audit, retrieved 2009-10-03
- ↑ The Transport Politic: "Transit Mode Share Trends Looking Steady; Rail Appears to Encourage Non-Automobile Commutes", October 13th, 2010
- ↑ Mees, Paul et al. : Travel to work in Australian capital cities 1976-2006, 2007
- ↑ Charter of Brussels, retrieved 2009-10-03