Solutions
A key aspect of mobility management is that it is normally a site specific problem and so solutions have to be adapted to the site in question. Nonetheless, there are commonalities in the solutions that sites have adapted to their own situations. Solutions can be sub-divided into two categories, firstly those that reduce the need to travel completely (such as teleconferencing in place of business travel), and secondly those that try to reduce car use. This latter category can be further subdivided into those measures that provide incentives to use alternatives to the car, and those that act as a disincentive to car use. Their relative advantages and disadvantages are compared at the bottom of this page, but firstly some of the more common solutions are described briefly, as follows.
Reducing the need to travel
BPR and teleworking
Sometimes the most effective way to solve transport problems is to eliminate completely the need to travel. Examples include Business Process Reengineering (BPR) as well as working from home, teleconferencing and changing working hours to work the same time in fewer days. Next to being very effective, these options can enhance productivity and are often popular with employees. Read more...
Disincentives to car use
Parking management
Managing parking has been found to be a very effective tool in mobility management: it strongly influences people’s travel decisions. In addition, many organisations get involved in mobility management to start with, because they have a parking problem, or want to reduce their parking costs. Managing limited parking may include rationing, giving a parking space only to certain users (e.g. carpoolers), charging, or sharing parking between site users at one central point, rather than providing some parking right next to each building. Read more...
Incentives to use alternatives to (solo) car use
Buses and other public transport improvements
Sites lobby for and/or procure (buy) for themselves new bus links to improve their accessibility by public transport. They may also arrange cut-price travel for their site-users on existing local public transport. Bus improvements are particularly suited to sites with large numbers of users (e.g. employment sites with 1,000+ staff), where many users live relatively close by (less than 12km) and in clusters or along clear routes to the site; alternatively they can be useful to link two sites of the same organisation (shuttle buses), or a site with a park and ride car park. Bus fare improvements can help where there is already a good bus service. Occasionally, very large sites may also be able to lobby for improved rail services if there is a railway station nearby. Read more...
Encouraging pooling
Here sites try to encourage people to share transport – either their own car, or special vans (minibuses) - to get to the site, reducing total trips by car, and parking demand. They do this by means of matching databases, special parking spaces for carpools and vanpools, and/or cash incentives to pool. Pooling is particularly suited to sites with poor public transport and with users who travel there regularly from quite some distance away (15km plus each way). Read more...
Promoting cycling and walking
Cycling and walking improvements include providing better parking for cyclists, showers, lockers and other facilities so that those who travel by these modes to a site will be able to change clothes if they need to. In addition, some sites may provide low cost rental bikes for work trips, and subsidised bike purchase for employees. Larger sites may try to make sure that there are safe bike and walking routes within their site area that link properly to any similar routes outside. Cycling and walking measures are best suited to sites where users do not have to travel very far, or where there are opportunities to combine these modes with public transport. Read more...
Combining solutions (mobility card, website, travel facility point)
To cater for the demands of different site users, many sites implement not just one, but a combination of measures. In addition, there are some measures which can help meet a number of different objectives at the same time, such as a mobility card. A mobility card allows users to pay for a variety of mobility services using just one card. Parking, bus, train and light rail as well as hire bicycles can all be included. This makes it simple to use all these modes, and removes the barrier of not having the right money to use public transport. A similar mechanism applies to dedicated websites and a travel facility point. Read more...
Marketing and information
Information and marketing are key to mobility management. They build on the benefits of improvements in buses, carpooling and cycling and walking measures. Read more...
Advantages and disadvantages of different solutions
|
Solution
|
Most suited situations
|
Ease of implementation
|
Effectiveness in reducing car use
|
Cost
|
|
Reducing the need to travel
|
|
|
| BPR, teleworking, etc. |
Adaptable to most situations where physical presence at worksite is not always needed
|
Moderate – requires some changes to organisation’s operations
|
Can be highly effective; compressed work weeks can reduce car use by 10-20%
|
Low to negative
|
|
Disincentives to car use
|
|
|
|
|
Parking management
|
Where parking demand exceeds supply and there are no other parking alternatives nearby.
|
Difficult, although opposition reduces significantly after implementation.
|
Highly effective – 10-15% reductions in car use possible.
|
High capital outlay returned through charges
|
|
Improving alternatives to car use
|
|
|
|
|
Bus/other public transport improve-ments
|
Users live within 12 km of site and in clusters or along corridors, easier to serve by bus.
|
Difficult if site manager cannot directly buy-in additional bus services. Otherwise moderate.
|
In suitable situations with correct level of resources this can be a very effective measure. Up to 12% reduction in car use achievable.
|
High
|
|
Encouraging pooling
|
Users live further away from site (20 km or more) and travel to site regularly at regular times.
|
Carpooling relatively easy. Vanpooling problematic from taxation point of view in UK.
|
In suitable situations, moderate reduction in single occupant car use (5%-7%) achievable.
|
Low (car-pools)
|
|
Promoting cycling /
Promoting walking
|
Users live close to site; cycling and walking facilities good in local area; distances short.
|
Relatively easy.
|
Very site specific but in suitable locations can achieve reductions in car use of up to 9% achievable.
|
Low-medium
|
|
Combining solutions
|
|
|
|
| Combination of measures |
Works anywhere
|
Moderate to difficult
|
Highly variable
|
Highly variable
|
To read more about measures in mobility management and their effectiveness, click here. |
