Citation

Sammer G, Gruber C, Roeschel G, Tomschy R, Herry M. Transp. Res. Proc. 2018; 32: 649-658.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2018, Elsevier Publications)

DOI

10.1016/j.trpro.2018.10.006

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Travel behaviour surveys are an essential basis for the implementation of a transport policy in line with society's targets. Therefore, the assurance of the quality of the collection of data about travel behaviour is enormously important. A key problem is the fact that transport demand is underreported and biased in transport surveys. This is true for both passenger traffic and goods transport, if one uses the indicator ‛trip between origin-destination'. Depending on the mode of transport and mobility indicator, such as length of trip, duration of trip, modal split, travel purpose or share of mobile persons, the underreporting of trips has different implications. It is generally true that the published results of travel behaviour surveys, both at a national and local level, hardly ever address this underreporting of trips which, according to estimates, amounts to up to -30% of the total. The reasons for the underreporting of travel behaviour are complex. The survey method itself is one key cause. Suitable weighting and imputation processes for trips which were not recorded might be a way to avoid any bias due to underreporting. By using a passive GPS survey in combination with traditional travel diary survey and in-depth interviews, trips missing from a complete mobility pattern of individual interviewees can be identified and used in an imputation model. Another promising solution is the use of weighting with independently collected "Big Data" of the transport networks.

Language: en