Public Transport Appreciation: A Comprehensive Analysis of User Perceptions and Influencing Factors in Italian Urban Contexts
Abstract
Systems of public transportation are essential to urban mobility because they provide social, economic, and environmental advantages. To improve service quality and advance sustainable transportation, it is crucial to comprehend how users perceive these systems. This paper explores the many facets of appreciating public transportation, in Italian urban contexts looking at elements like affordability, accessibility, service quality, environmental impact, and technological integration. This study uses information gathered from a nationwide survey to examine how the public and local public transportation users in Italy are perceived. The purpose of the study is to provide indications and to evaluate how frequent and infrequent users value several facets of public transportation services, such as accessibility, cost, frequency, cleanliness, timeliness, and environmental impact. A wide range of demographic samples contributed responses, offering a thorough picture of regional variations and shared issues. We seek to give a thorough overview of the factors influencing public transportation enjoyment and its implications for practice and policy by synthesizing recent research and empirical data.
The findings highlight the significant challenge of changing travel habits, given that 72% of respondents own a car and 87% prefer private transportation over public options. This underscores the importance of promoting more sustainable. mobility options through advancements in public transportation infrastructure, safety perceptions, and urban design. In the end, a major obstacle in determining Italy's transportation future is striking a balance between environmental objectives and ease. The findings highlight how difficult it is to change travel habits and how important it is to promote more sustainable mobility options through advancements in public transportation infrastructure, safety perceptions, and urban design. In the end, a major obstacle in determining Italy's transportation future is striking a balance between environmental objectives and ease.
Downloads
PlumX Statistics
References
2. Beirão, G., & Sarsfield Cabral, J. A. (2007). Understanding attitudes towards public transport and private car: A qualitative study. Transport Policy, 14(6), 478–489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2007.04.009
3. Buehler, R., & Pucher, J. (2012). Sustainable transport in Freiburg: Lessons from Germany's environmental capital. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 6(1), 43–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/15568318.2011.637155
4. Cao, X., & Mokhtarian, P. L. (2005). The impact of service quality on transit ridership. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 39(4), 341–358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2005.02.003
5. Currie, G. (2010). Quantifying spatial gaps in public transport coverage. Journal of Transport Geography, 18(1), 31–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2008.12.002
6. Currie, G., & Delbosc, A. (2011). Exploring public transport usage trends in Australia. Transportation Research Record, 2217(1), 91–98. https://doi.org/10.3141/2217-12
7. de Oña, J., Estévez, E., & de Oña, R. (2021). Public transport users versus private vehicle users: Differences about quality of service, satisfaction and attitudes toward public transport in Madrid (Spain). Travel Behaviour and Society, 23, 76–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2021.03.006
8. De Vos, J., Ermagun, A., & Shaw, F. A. (2023). Wait time, travel time, and waiting during travel: Existing research and future directions. Transport Reviews, 43(5), 805-810.
9. Drabicki, A., Cats, O., Kucharski, R., Fonzone, A., & Szarata, A. (2023). Should I stay or should I board? Willingness to wait with real-time crowding information in urban public transport. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 47, 100963.
10. Eboli, L., & Mazzulla, G. (2007). Service quality attributes affecting customer satisfaction for bus transit. Journal of Public Transportation, 10(3), 21–34. https://doi.org/10.5038/2375-0901.10.3.2
11. Fransen, K., Versigghel, J., Guzman Vargas, D., Semanjski, I., & Gautama, S. (2023). Sustainable mobility strategies deconstructed: A taxonomy of urban vehicle access regulations. European Transport Research Review, 15, Article 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-023-00576-3
12. Gardner, B., & Abraham, C. (2008). Psychological correlates of car use: A meta-analysis. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 11(4), 300–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2008.01.004
13. Hensher, D. A., & Rose, J. M. (2007). Behavioral modeling and analysis of travel demand: A review. Transport Reviews, 27(3), 281–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441640601064496
14. Ho, H., Choi, J., No, W., Oh, M., & Kim, Y. (2021). Accessibility of welfare facilities for elderly people in Daejeon, South Korea, considering public transportation accessibility. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 12.
15. Jamei, E., Chan, M., Chau, H. W., Gaisie, E., & Lättman, K. (2022). Perceived accessibility and key influencing factors in transportation. Sustainability, 14(17), Article 10806. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141710806
16. Jittrapirom, P., Caiati, V., Feneri, A. M., Ebrahimigharehbaghi, S., Alonso-González, M. J., & Narayan, J. (2017). Mobility as a service: A critical review of definitions, assessments of schemes, and key challenges. Urban Planning, 2(2), 13–25. https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v2i2.931
17. Kusi, S. B., Amoako-Sakyi, R. O., Abraham, C. H., Addo, N. A., Aboagye-McCarthy, A., & Gyan, B. O. (2024). Access to public transport for persons with visual disabilities: A scoping review. British Journal of Visual Impairment, 42(1), 71-85.
18. Lin, D., & Cui, J. (2021). Transport and mobility needs for an ageing society from a policy perspective: Review and implications. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(22), 11802.
19. Litman, T. (2023). Fair share transportation planning. Victoria Transport Policy Institute. Retrieved from www.vtpi.org
20. Lucas, K. (2012). Transport and social exclusion: Where are we now? Transport Policy, 20, 105–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2012.01.013
21. McKinsey & Company (2018). McKinsey Center for Future Mobility. www.mckinsey.com. https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/business%20functions/sustainability/our%20insights/elements%20of%20success%20urban%20transportation%20systems%20of%2024%20global%20cities/urban-transportation-systems_e-versions.pdf
22. Ministry of Infrastructure and Transport/Ministero delle Infrastrutture e dei Trasporti (2024). Conto Nazionale dei Trasporti. https://www.mit.gov.it/nfsmitgov/files/media/pubblicazioni/2024-09/CNIT%202022-2023_bassa%20risoluzione_segnalibri.pdf
23. Pojani, D., & Stead, D. (2015). Sustainable urban transport in the developing world: Beyond megacities. Sustainability, 7(6), 7784–7805. https://doi.org/10.3390/su7067784
24. Pyrialakou, V. D., Gkritza, K., & Fricker, J. D. (2016). Accessibility, mobility, and realized travel behavior: Assessing transport disadvantage from a policy perspective. Journal of Transport Geography, 51, 252–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2016.02.001
25. Rima, R., Noor, M., Ubong, I., Tartaglia, M. (2024). User Satisfaction of Accessibility to Public Transportation. Environment-Behaviour Proceedings Journal. 9. 171-177. 10.21834/e-bpj.v9i30.6206.
26. Shaheen, S., Cohen, A., & Chung, M. (2013). Smart growth and shared mobility: Evidence from the San Francisco Bay Area. Transportation Research Record, 2387(1), 110–119. https://doi.org/10.3141/2387-13
27. Shibayama, T., & Emberger, G. (2023). Ensuring sustainable mobility in urban periphery, rural areas and remote regions. European Transport Research Review, 15, Article 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-023-00584-3
28. Steg, L., & Vlek, C. (2009). Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: An integrative review and research agenda. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(3), 309–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.10.004
29. Stjernborg, V. (2024). Triggers for feelings of insecurity and perceptions of safety in relation to public transport: The experiences of young and active travellers. Applied Mobilities, 1-21.
30. Tirachini, A., & Hensher, D. A. (2011). Assessing the impact of information systems on transit ridership: Evidence from Santiago, Chile. Transportation Research Record, 2216(1), 53–59. https://doi.org/10.3141/2216-06
31. Tirachini, A., & Hensher, D. A. (2019). Ride-hailing, travel behaviour and sustainable transport: An international review. Transportation, 46, 201–215. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-018-9923-1
32. Twardzik, E., Schrack, J. A., Porter, K. M. P., Coleman, T., Washington, K., & Swenor, B. K. (2024). TRansit ACessibility Tool (TRACT): Developing a novel scoring system for public transportation system accessibility. Journal of Transport & Health, 34, 101742.
33. Tyrinopoulos, Y., & Antoniou, C. (2008). Public transit user satisfaction: Variability and policy implications. Transport Policy, 15(4), 260–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2008.06.002
34. United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration. (2017). Shared mobility: Current practices and guiding principles. https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop16022/fhwahop16022.pdf
35. Vuchic, V. R. (2005). Urban transit: Operations, planning, and economics. Wiley.
36. Wang, S., Liu, Y., & Corcoran, J. (2021). Equity of public transport costs before and after a fare policy reform: An empirical evaluation using smartcard data. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 144, 104-118.
37. Zakaria, A. M., Kamaluddin, N. A., Hashim, W.,D’Agostino, C. (2024). Age-inclusive transit environments: An exploration of public transportation systems for the elderly. Environment-Behaviour Proceedings Journal, 9(28), 149-158.
Copyright (c) 2025 Elisabetta Venezia, Giulia Nicolardi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
