skip to main content
10.1145/3239060.3239079acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesautomotiveuiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Where Autonomous Buses Might and Might Not Bridge the Gaps in the 4 A's of Public Transport Passenger Needs: a Review

Published:23 September 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

In the domain of public transport, automation provides several advantages which can lead to better services for the customers. For tapping the full potential of future automated public transport services, passenger requirements have to be thoroughly considered in order to avoid shortcomings discouraging future users to remain or become customers and to support the role of public transit as sustainable backbone of transport.

This paper assesses the potential of autonomous bus services with respect to four categories of passenger requirements described as the "4 A's of Public Transport Passenger Needs": availability, affordability, accessibility, and acceptability. Based on a review of currently discussed scenarios of automation, benefits and risks regarding the specific needs of different passenger groups are explored for these four categories. Finally, open issues which require special attention or further research are identified.

References

  1. I. Borges. 2012. The added value of accessible public transport for all in the context of demographic ageing. AGE Presentation at XXIII World Road Congress, Paris, France. August 21, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. ERTRAC, 2017. Automated Driving Roadmap, Available at: http://www.ertrac.org/uploads/images/ERTRAC_Automated_Driving_2017.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. P. Fröhlich, A. Millonig, L. Diamond, M. Gruber, Ch. Zinner, W. Ponweiser, K. Schwieger, S. Seer, M. Tscheligi. 2017. Reading the Mind of a Bus: Challenges for Transparent Interaction with Automated Vehicles. 19th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (MobileHCI 2017), Vienna, Austria. September 4-7, 2017, 4 p.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. GOAL. 2012. Older People and Public Transport. Deliverable 4.1, GOAL project from http://www.goal-project.eu/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. K. Markvica, N. Haufe, A. Millonig. 2016. Using Milieu-Based Communication Strategies For Changing Mobility Behaviour Towards Low Energy Modes. In Proceedings of the 4th European Conference on Behaviour and Energy Efficiency, M.A.R. Lopes, Antunes C. Henggeler, Martins A. Gomes, L. Silva (eds.), (Behave 2016). INESC Coimbra & ADENE, Coimbra, Portugal.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. pteg - Passenger Transport Executives Group. 2010. Transport and Social Inclusion: Have we made the connections in our cities? pteg, Wellington House, Leeds, May 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. K. Rehrl and C. Zankl, 2018, Digibus: Results from the first Self-Driving Shuttle Trial on a Public Road in Austria. In: Proceedings of 7th Transport Research Arena TRA 2018, April 16-19, 2018, Vienna, Austria.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. C. Rohr, L. Ecola, J. Zmud, F. Dunkerley, J. Black, E. Baker. 2016. Travel in Britain in 2035: Future scenarios and their implications for technology innovation. In Innovate UK from https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1377.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. B. Shrestha, A. Millonig, N. Hounsell, M. McDonald. 2017. Review of Public Transport Needs of Older People in European Context. In Journal of Population Ageing (2017) 10: 343.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. SOHJOA, 2016. SOHJOA Robot Bus Project. Available at: http://sohjoa.fi/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. TPF, 2017. The very first automated public passenger transportation service. Available at: http://www.tpf.ch/en/-/une-navette-automatisee-pour-desservir-le-marly-innovation-center.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Trapeze, 2017. Verkehrsbetriebe Schaffhausen fahren autonom. Available at: http://www.trapezegroup.de/news/verkehrsbetriebe-schaffhausen-fahren-autonom.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. S. Trommer, V. Kolarova, E. Frädrich et al. 2016. Autonomous driving - The impact of vehicle automation on mobility behavior. From https://www.ifmo.de/publications.html?t=45.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. J. Urry. 2016. What is the future. Polity Press, Cambridge, UK, Malden, MA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. F. Vallet, J. Puchinger, A. Millonig. 2018. Utiliser des personas pour raconter la mobilité en 2030. At Conférence "lères Rencontres Francophones Transport Mobilité (RFTM)", 6-8 Jun 2018, Lyon, France.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. M. van Hagen, A. Pruyn, M. Galetzka and J. Kramer. 2009. Waiting is Becoming Fun! The Influence of Advertising and Infotainment on the Waiting Experience. In Proceedings of the European Transport Congress, Noordwijkerhout, The Netherlands, Oct. 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Where Autonomous Buses Might and Might Not Bridge the Gaps in the 4 A's of Public Transport Passenger Needs: a Review

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        AutomotiveUI '18: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications
        September 2018
        374 pages
        ISBN:9781450359467
        DOI:10.1145/3239060

        Copyright © 2018 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 23 September 2018

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed limited

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate248of566submissions,44%

        Upcoming Conference

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader