Estonia's capital made mass transit free a decade ago. Car traffic went up
fastcompany.com
fastcompany.com
Bicycle infrastructure is also very inconsistent. You can end up riding on a nice, physically separated path, then find yourself driving on painted gutters that are bumpier than the surface cars ride on. Connections between bicycle paths are also awful. One time I just found that the bicycle path just stops with a dead-end, and the only option was to continue driving on the road alongside cars.
Car usage rising has a lot to do with city leadership not taking steps that actually discourage car dependency. Making mass transit free or very affordable is good, but it has to be accompanied with steps that actually make public transportation a better option compared to cars. The most convenient option wins, always.
It is much, much easier for Estonians to afford cars than it was a decade ago. Without making transit free, car traffic easily could have gone up even more.
The lesson for planners and government here is clear: combine free transit with measures to make it massively more incovenient and expensive to own a private automobile.
How did you make a jump to that conclusion? Correlation doesn’t mean that it’s a sole reason (or even one of the reasons)
This could be because making transit free reduces the underutilization of large mass transit systems.
... the market will regulate everything. /s
For less dogmatic people, it may be useful to reflect on what else needs to be done to make public transit useful to more people, beyond the price.
If you want ppl to use mass transit, provide fast & frequent transport in all the country. This means more units, dedicated lanes, priority on semaphores, easy methods to pay, more trains.
When mass transit is so frequent and easy to use you don't need to plan ahead when to leave your house- that's the moment more ppl will use it. One nice addition will be dedicated buses for children going to school to demotivate parents buying a car just bc of kids
The sane thing to do is to experiment with a pilot program and adapt for the local context. Even then there are many problems to weed out with experimental biases and sampling issues, etc. - but it is less terrible.
Whatever services public transit was offering failed to meet the needs of many Estonians. It doesn't matter how inexpensive your product is if it doesn't deliver what people want.
- During the 2010s GDP and real wages of these countries increased a lot. Cars shifted from being a luxury to being a standard - especially for younger people. We have a strong used car market, so cars are cheap to buy and repair here. I paid €3000 for a MPV which is my daily earlier this year.
- Routes and frequency have not changed. It's not like London where there is a bus stop every 100m and maybe in the worse case you need to wait 12 minutes. In my area buses run every 20 minutes at the best of times, and the closest bus stops are 500m apart.
- Public transport and buses are seen by the city as a cost center, not as something that makes the city better, so investment is not forthcoming.
Although we have some brand new buses, most of them are 10+ year old buses bought second hand from Germany. Trolley buses are even worse (as they aren't as transferable as buses). A lot of them are nearly 30 years old. They are slow, uncomfortable and have no working heating during winter.
- To take a bus to my office (central part of the city next to a large shopping mall) I'd need to change 3 times and if everything goes as planned it would take me just over an hour. Compare that to driving where in the best case it takes 15 minutes, or 30 minutes if the traffic is bad.
It's much quicker and much more comfortable to drive. Parking is not an issue as all new office buildings and apartment block have underground parking.