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] Surveys covering entire metropolitan areas are preferred over city proper surveys which typically cover only the denser inner city.
Modal split of journeys to work
The following tables present the modal split of journeys to work. Note that it is better to use a measure of all trips on a typical weekday, but journey to work data is more readily available. It would also be beneficial to disaggregate private motor vehicles figures to car driver, car passengers and motorbikes (especially relevant for Asian cities).
Metropolitan areas with over 1,000,000 inhabitants
| Metro area | walking | cycling | public transport | private motor vehicle | year | Survey Area |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Adelaide |
3% | 1% | 11% | 85% | 2016[4] | GCCSA |
 Atlanta
|
1% | 0% | 3% | 86% | 2016[5] | UA |
 Athens |
8% | 2% | 37% | 53% | 2006 [6] | |
 Auckland |
4% | 1% | 9% | 85% | 2011–2014[7] | MUA |
| Baltimore
|
3% | 0% | 7% | 84% | 2016[8] | UA |
 Barcelona |
32% | 2% | 39% | 27% | 2013[9] | |
 Beijing |
21% | 32% | 26% | 21% | 2005/2011[10] | |
 Belgrade |
23% | 1% | 49% | 27% | 2015 | |
 Berlin |
30% | 18% | 27% | 26% | 2018 | |
| Brisbane |
4% | 1% | 14% | 81% | 2016[11] | GCCSA |
 Brussels |
25% | 2.5% | 28% | 43% | 2010[12] | |
 Bogota |
15% | 2% | 64% | 19% | 2008[10] | |
| Boston |
5% | 1% | 14% | 73% | 2016[13] | UA |
 Budapest |
32% | 1% | 47% | 20% | 2011 | |
 Calgary
|
4.7% | 1.5% | 14.4% | 79.4% | 2016 | |
| Chicago |
3% | 1% | 13% | 77% | 2016[14] | UA |
| Dallas |
1% | 0% | 2% | 90% | 2016[15] | UA |
 Daejeon |
26% | 2% | 28% | 44% | 2012[16] | |
 Delhi |
21% | 12% | 48% | 19% | 2008/2011[10] | |
| Detroit
|
1% | 0% | 2% | 92% | 2016[17] | |
| Edmonton
|
3.7% | 1.0% | 11.3% | 84% | 2016 | |
| Hamburg |
28% | 12% | 18% | 42% | 2008[18] | |
 Helsinki |
29% | 9% | 22% | 39% | 2018[19] | |
 Hong Kong |
11% | 0.5% | 77% | 12% | 2011[20] | |
| Houston |
1% | 0% | 2% | 91% | 2016[21] | UA |
| Indianapolis |
1% | 0% | 1% | 91% | 2016[22] | UA |
 Jakarta |
1% | 0.2% | 20% | 78%* | 2019[23] | UA *67% motorbike |
| Las Vegas |
1% | 0% | 4% | 90% | 2016[24] | UA |
 London |
24% | 2% | 37% | 37% | 2016[25] | |
| Los Angeles |
3% | 1% | 5% | 85% | 2016[26] | UA |
| Madrid |
34% | 0.5% | 24% | 40% | 2018 [27] | |
 Manila |
9% | 2% | 44% | 45% | 2019[10] | |
| Melbourne |
4% | 2% | 19% | 76% | 2016[11] | GCCSA |
| Miami
|
2% | 1% | 4% | 87% | 2016[28] | UA |
 Milan |
17% | 6% | 41% | 36% | 2007 [29] | |
 Minsk |
13% | 1% | 63% | 20% | 2016 [30] | |
| Montreal |
5% | 2% | 22% | 70% | 2016[31] | CMA |
| Mumbai |
27% | 6% | 52% | 15% | 2008/2011[10] | |
| Munich |
24% | 18% | 24% | 34% | 2017 | |
| New York City |
28% | 3% | 31% | 32% | 2018[32] | UA |
 Osaka |
7% | 19% | 61% | 13% | 2010[33] | |
| Ottawa
|
8% | 2% | 18% | 72% | 2016[34] | CMA |
 Paris |
15% | 5% | 59% | 20% | 2010[35] | |
| Perth |
3% | 1% | 12% | 84% | 2016[11] | GCCSA |
| Philadelphia |
4% | 1% | 10% | 80% | 2016[36] | UA |
| Phoenix |
2% | 1% | 2% | 87% | 2016[37] | UA |
| Portland |
3% | 3% | 7% | 78% | 2016[38] | UA |
 Prague |
22% | 0.4% | 52% | 25% | 2017[39] | |
 Rio de Janeiro |
29% | 3% | 43% | 25% | 2012[40] | UA |
| Rome |
4% | 1% | 29% | 66% | 2014[41] | |
| San Antonio |
2% | 0% | 3% | 90% | 2016[42] | UA |
| San Diego |
3% | 1% | 3% | 85% | 2016[43] | UA |
| San Francisco |
5% | 2% | 20% | 64% | 2016[44] | UA |
| San Jose |
2% | 2% | 5% | 84% | 2016[45] | UA |
| São Paulo |
32% | 1% | 36% | 31% | 2017[46] | UA |
| Seattle |
4% | 1% | 10% | 77% | 2016[47] | UA |
| Seoul
|
N/A | 4% | 66% | 23% | 2014[48] | |
| Shanghai |
27% | 20% | 33% | 20% | 2009/2011[10] | |
 Singapore |
22% | 1% | 44% | 33% | 2011[10] | |
| Sydney |
5% | 1% | 27% | 67% | 2016[11] | GCCSA |
 Taipei |
13% | 4% | 43% | 40% | 2016[49] | |
| Tokyo |
23% | 14% | 51% | 12% | 2008/2009[10] | |
| Toronto |
5% | 1% | 24% | 68% | 2016[50] | CMA |
| Vancouver
|
7% | 2% | 20% | 69% | 2016 | CMA |
 Vienna |
26% | 7% | 39% | 28% | 2014[51] | |
 Warsaw |
18% | 3% | 47% | 32% | 2015[52] | |
| Washington, D.C. |
4% | 1% | 16% | 72% | 2016[53] | UA |
Metropolitan areas with over 250,000 inhabitants
| Metro area | walking | cycling | public transport | private motor vehicle | year |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Aarhus |
7% | 27% | 19% | 43% | 2004 |
| Alicante |
18% | 0% | 13% | 69% | 2004 |
 Amsterdam |
4% | 40% | 29% | 27% | 2014 |
| Bari |
13% | 1% | 14% | 72% | 2001 |
 Basel |
33% | 17% | 27% | 22% | 2015[54] |
| Bern |
30% | 15% | 32% | 22% | 2015[55] |
| Bilbao |
23% | 0% | 34% | 43% | 2004 |
| Birmingham |
1% | 1% | 25% | 66% | 2001 |
| Bologna |
8% | 4% | 21% | 67% | 2001 |
| Bonn |
29% | 12% | 14% | 46% | 2008 |
 Bratislava |
4% | 0% | 70% | 26% | 2004 |
| Brno |
5% | 2% | 57% | 32% | 2012 [56] |
| Buffalo |
6% | 1% | 14% | 79% | 2012 |
| Bremen |
25% | 23% | 16% | 36% | 2013 |
| Bristol |
19% | 8% | 12% | 55% | 2011 [57] |
| Canberra |
5% | 3% | 8% | 85% | 2016[11] |
| Christchurch |
4% | 5% | 4% | 87% | 2011–2014 [7] |
| Cologne |
7% | 15% | 28% | 50% | 2013 |
| Copenhagen |
10% | 30% | 36% | 26% | 2012 |
| Córdoba |
18% | 1% | 10% | 71% | 2004 |
| Dortmund |
19% | 10% | 22% | 49% | 2019 |
| Dresden |
26% | 18% | 20% | 36% | 2018 |
 Dublin |
13.2% | 7.6% | 21.5% | 48.5% | 2016[58] |
| Düsseldorf |
29% | 12% | 19% | 40% | 2013 |
| Edinburgh |
19% | 7% | 30% | 42% | 2009-2010[59] |
| Eindhoven |
3% | 24% | 8% | 65% | 2004 |
| Essen |
19% | 7% | 19% | 55% | 2019 |
| Florence |
8% | 4% | 21% | 69% | 2001 |
| Frankfurt |
11% | 15% | 30% | 44% | 2015 |
| Freiburg im Breisgau |
29% | 34% | 16% | 21% | 2017 |
| Gent |
13% | 33% | 15% | 40% | 2018[60] |
| Gdańsk |
20.8% | 5.9% | 32.1% | 41.2% | 2016[61] |
| Gijón |
24% | 0% | 17% | 59% | 2004 |
 Gothenburg |
12% | 14% | 21% | 52% | 2004 |
| Halifax |
8% | 1% | 12% | 78% | 2016[62] |
| Hamilton |
4% | 1% | 10% | 84% | 2016[63] |
| Hanover |
26% | 19% | 19% | 36% | 2017 |
| Helsinki |
37% | 10% | 30% | 22% | 2016 |
| 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 |
24% | 14% | 23% | 39% | 2019 |
 Oslo |
29% | 6% | 30% | 34% | 2013 |
| Palermo |
12% | 1% | 9% | 78% | 2001 |
| Quebec City |
2% | 6% | 11% | 80% | 2016[64] |
| Rotterdam |
5% | 14% | 25% | 56% | 2004 |
| Stockholm |
15% | 7% | 43% | 33% | 2004 |
 Tel Aviv |
16% | 13% | 28% | 43% | 2015[65] |
| The Hague |
5% | 22% | 30% | 43% | 2004 |
| Seville |
13% | 7% | 18% | 62% | 2014 |
| Stuttgart |
26% | 5% | 24% | 45% | 2010 |
 Tallinn |
11% | 2% | 35% | 48% | 2017[66] |
| Turin |
12% | 3% | 5% | 79% | 2004 |
| Utrecht |
25.3% | 48.4% | 5.4% | 18.7% | 2018[67] |
| Valencia |
16% | 1% | 21% | 62% | 2004 |
| Valladolid |
22% | 1% | 20% | 57% | 2004 |
| Vigo |
19% | 0% | 13% | 68% | 2004 |
 Vilnius |
36% | 0% | 26% | 38% | 2011[68] |
| Wellington |
10% | 1% | 23% | 62% | 2011–2014[7] |
| Victoria (CMA)
|
10% | 7% | 11% | 70% | 2016 |
| Winnipeg |
5% | 2% | 14% | 79% | 2016[69] |
| Zaragoza |
45.91% | 2.90% | 23.71% | 26.88% | 2017 [70] |
| Zürich |
33% | 12% | 32% | 21% | 2015[71] |
| Mean ± SD | 13±8% | 8±9% | 24±13% | 55±17% |
Notes: European data is based on the Urban Audit[72]
Modal share targets
The Charter of Brussels, signed by 36 cities including Brussels, Ghent, Milan, Munich, Seville, Edinburgh, Toulouse, Bordeaux, Gdansk, and Timișoara, commits the signatories to achieve at least 15% of bicycling modal share by 2020, and calls upon European institutions to do likewise.[73] The cycling modal share is strongly associated with the size of local cycling infrastructure [74]
The Canadian city of Hamilton adopted a similar modal share target plan in 2005.[75]
Modal share in the developing world
The modal share differs considerably depending on each city in the developing world.[76][77][78]
According to UNECE, the global on-road vehicle fleet is to double by 2050 (from 1,2 billion to 2,5 billion,[79] see introduction), with most future car purchases taking place in developing countries. Some experts even mention that the number of vehicles in developing countries will increase by 4 or 5-fold by 2050 (compared to current car use levels), and that the majority of these will be second-hand.[11][80]
Legislation impacting the modal share
Through legislation (i.e. taxing and conditions on new car purchases), ... car ownership can be discouraged. This could help in achieving a modal shift.[81]
See also
- Car ownership
- Phase-out of fossil fuel vehicles
- 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
- Road reallocation
- Environmental aspects of the electric car
- Smart mobility
External links
- Epomm – Modal share data for more than 300 Cities with more or less than 100,000 inhabitants, mostly in Europe
- [8] – Modal share data and trends over the past 20 years for Australian cities (unpublished paper by David Ashley)
References
- ^ Glossary (Engineering Services – Transportation, City of Vancouver website. Accessed 2009-06-04.) Archived June 3, 2006, at the Wayback Machine
- ^ http://www.ramblers.org.uk/Walking/policy/transport/transportleisure
- ^ "Singapore Land and Transport Authority: Journeys, issue 7, November 2011" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2014-07-14. Retrieved 2014-07-11.
- ^ "Trends in journey to work mode shares in Australian cities to 2016 (second edition)". Charting Transport. 2017-10-24. Retrieved 2018-04-15.
- ^ "Census profile: Atlanta, GA Urbanized Area". Census Reporter. Retrieved 2018-04-16.
- ^ http://www.epomm.eu/tems/result_city.phtml?city=221
- ^ a b c [1]
- ^ "Census profile: Baltimore, MD Urbanized Area". Census Reporter. Retrieved 2018-04-16.
- ^ http://prod-mobilitat.s3.amazonaws.com/DADESBASIQUES2013_p1.pdf
- ^ a b c d e f g h "Passenger Transport Mode Shares in World Cities" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2014-07-15. Retrieved 2014-07-11.
- ^ a b c d e f Charting Transport, retrieved 27 October 2017
- ^ Camille Thiry (ed.). "Cahiers de l'Observatoire de la mobilité de la Région de Bruxelles-Capitale: Les pratiques de déplacement à Bruxelles" (PDF) (in French). Bruxelles mobilité. p. 49. Retrieved 25 November 2013.
- ^ "Census profile: Boston, MA--NH--RI Urbanized Area". Census Reporter. Retrieved 2018-04-16.
- ^ "Census profile: Chicago, IL--IN Urbanized Area". Census Reporter. Retrieved 2018-04-16.
- ^ "Census profile: Dallas--Fort Worth--Arlington, TX Urbanized Area". Census Reporter. Retrieved 2018-04-16.
- ^ [KOTI, "2013 National Transportation DB Report" 2013], retrieved 2013-12-31
- ^ "Census profile: Detroit, MI Urbanized Area". Census Reporter. Retrieved 2018-04-16.
- ^ Page 7 in Infas: Mobilität im Großraum Hamburg
- ^ Page 61: Kulkutapajakauma Helsingin seudulla
- ^ Travel Characteristics Survey 2011
- ^ "Census profile: Houston, TX Urbanized Area". Census Reporter. Retrieved 2018-04-16.
- ^ "Census profile: Indianapolis, IN Urbanized Area". Census Reporter. Retrieved 2018-04-16.
- ^ [2]
- ^ "Census profile: Las Vegas--Henderson, NV Urbanized Area". Census Reporter. Retrieved 2018-04-16.
- ^ Transport for London: "Travel in London" Report 10, 2017
- ^ "Census profile: Los Angeles--Long Beach--Anaheim, CA Urbanized Area". Census Reporter. Retrieved 2018-04-16.
- ^ "Encuesta de movilidad de la Comunidad de Madrid 2018 - Documento de síntesis" (PDF).
- ^ "Census profile: Miami, FL Urbanized Area". Census Reporter. Retrieved 2018-04-16.
- ^ [3]
- ^ [4]
- ^ Canada, Government of Canada, Statistics. "Census Profile, 2016 Census – Montréal [Census metropolitan area], Quebec and Quebec [Province]". www12.statcan.gc.ca. Retrieved 2018-04-16.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 2021-03-09. Retrieved 2021-03-09.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link) - ^ "大阪市における人の動き：平成 22 年 第５回近畿圏パーソントリップ調査集計結果から" (PDF). 第5回パーソントリップ調査. Osaka City Hall. p. 8. Retrieved 7 April 2021.
- ^ Canada, Government of Canada, Statistics. "Census Profile, 2016 Census – Ottawa – Gatineau [Census metropolitan area], Ontario/Quebec and Ontario [Province]". www12.statcan.gc.ca. Retrieved 2018-04-16.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ [5]
- ^ "Census profile: Philadelphia, PA--NJ--DE--MD Urbanized Area". Census Reporter. Retrieved 2018-04-16.
- ^ "Census profile: Phoenix--Mesa, AZ Urbanized Area". Census Reporter. Retrieved 2018-04-16.
- ^ "Census profile: Portland, OR--WA Urbanized Area". Census Reporter. Retrieved 2018-04-16.
- ^ The yearbook of transportation Prague 2009 Archived 2011-07-26 at the Wayback Machine, page 5, retrieved 2011-03-23
- ^ "Page 41 in Monografia UFRJ 2015" (PDF). João Victor Costa. Retrieved 2020-05-15.
- ^ FGM-AMOR. "ENDURANCE :: Countries/Cities". www.epomm.eu. Retrieved 2018-04-27.
- ^ "Census profile: San Antonio, TX Urbanized Area". Census Reporter. Retrieved 2018-04-16.
- ^ "Census profile: San Diego, CA Urbanized Area". Census Reporter. Retrieved 2018-04-16.
- ^ "Census profile: San Francisco--Oakland, CA Urbanized Area". Census Reporter. Retrieved 2018-04-16.
- ^ "Census profile: San Jose, CA Urbanized Area". Census Reporter. Retrieved 2018-04-16.
- ^ "Page 39 in Pesquisa OD 2017". Metrô. Retrieved 2020-05-15.
- ^ "Census profile: Seattle, WA Urbanized Area". Census Reporter. Retrieved 2018-04-16.
- ^ "Public Transport in Seoul Metropolitan – K-Developedia" (PDF). K Developedia. 2014. Retrieved 16 August 2019.
- ^ Taipei City Hall. "市政統計週報". Retrieved 19 October 2018.
- ^ Canada, Government of Canada, Statistics (2017-02-08). "Census Profile, 2016 Census – Toronto [Census metropolitan area], Ontario and Toronto, Census division [Census division], Ontario". www12.statcan.gc.ca. Retrieved 2018-04-16.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ [6], (German) retrieved 2015-02-10
- ^ [7] Archived 2016-08-17 at the Wayback Machine, (Polish) retrieved 2016-01-20
- ^ "Census profile: Washington, DC--VA--MD Urbanized Area". Census Reporter. Retrieved 2018-04-16.
- ^ "Städtevergleich Mobilität Vergleichende Betrachtung der Städte Basel, Bern, Luzern, St.Gallen, Winterthur und Zürich im Jahr 2015" (PDF).
- ^ "Städtevergleich Mobilität Vergleichende Betrachtung der Städte Basel, Bern, Luzern, St.Gallen, Winterthur und Zürich im Jahr 2015" (PDF).
- ^ http://www.brno.cz/fileadmin/user_upload/sprava_mesta/magistrat_mesta_brna/OD/dokumenty_OKD/delba_prepravni_prace/Delba_prepravni_prace_2012.pdf
- ^ "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2014-07-24. Retrieved 2013-12-04.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link) - ^ https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-nts/nts2016/hwt/
- ^ https://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/downloads/file/24509/local-transport-strategy-2014---2019
- ^ "Verplaatsingsgedrag van de Gentenaar in 2018 2018".
- ^ "Gdańskie Badania Ruchu 2016".
- ^ Government of Canada, Statistics Canada (2017-02-08). "Census Profile, 2016 Census - Halifax [Census metropolitan area], Nova Scotia and Nova Scotia [Province]". www12.statcan.gc.ca. Retrieved 2020-08-05.
- ^ https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2016/dp-pd/prof/details/page.cfm?Lang=E&Geo1=CMACA&Code1=537&Geo2=PR&Code2=35&SearchText=hamilton&SearchType=Begins&SearchPR=01&B1=Journey%20to%20work&TABID=1&type=1.
{{cite web}}: Missing or empty|title=(help) - ^ Government of Canada, Statistics Canada (2017-02-08). "Census Profile, 2016 Census - Québec [Census metropolitan area], Quebec and Quebec [Province]". www12.statcan.gc.ca. Retrieved 2020-08-05.
- ^ http://civitas.eu/sites/default/files/tel_aviv-yafo_evolution_of_cycling_patterns_in_tel_aviv_benjamin_maor_haggai_yaron.pdf.
{{cite web}}: Missing or empty|title=(help) - ^ url=https://www.tallinn.ee/eng/g2677s113615[permanent dead link]
- ^ CBS. "Verplaatsingen in de gemeente Utrecht naar vervoerwijze, 2018" (PDF).
- ^ Naujų transporto rūšių diegimo Vilniaus mieste specialusis planas Archived 2013-12-03 at the Wayback Machine, retrieved 2013-07-03
- ^ Canada, Government of Canada, Statistics. "Census Profile, 2016 Census – Winnipeg [Census metropolitan area], Manitoba and Manitoba [Province]". www12.statcan.gc.ca. Retrieved 2018-04-16.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ "Revisión del plan de movilidad urbana sostenible Zaragoza" (PDF). Retrieved 2 June 2020.
- ^ "Städtevergleich Mobilität Vergleichende Betrachtung der Städte Basel, Bern, Luzern, St.Gallen, Winterthur und Zürich im Jahr 2015" (PDF).
- ^ Urban Audit Archived 2009-02-06 at the Wayback Machine, retrieved 2009-10-03
- ^ Charter of Brussels Archived 2009-07-31 at the Wayback Machine, retrieved 2009-10-03
- ^ Mueller, N (2018). "Health impact assessment of cycling network expansions in European cities". Preventive Medicine. 109: 62–70. doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2017.12.011. hdl:10230/42143. PMID 29330030.
- ^ http://www2.hamilton.ca/NR/rdonlyres/4929A56F-4222-4A62-B399-5E3860F7A764/0/AppendixB.pdf
- ^ Graphs of modal share in several cities
- ^ Energy End Use Transport report
- ^ How do people move around?
- ^ Used vehicle background overview
- ^ Regulation for 2nd hand vehicles
- ^ Green light for sustainable mobility