KIT – University of the State of Baden-Wuerttemberg and National Research Center of the Helmholtz Association INSTITUTE FOR TRANSPORT STUDIESINSTITUTE OF TRANSPORT RESEARCH DLR – German Aerospace Center within the Helmholtz Association Dr. Martin KagerbauerAngelika Schulz Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT)German Aerospace Center (DLR) Institute for Transport StudiesInstitute of Transport Research National Travel Survey and Mobility Panel: Collecting and Updating Passenger Mobility Information in Germany

Institute of Transport Research. German Aerospace Center (DLR) Dr. Martin Kagerbauer and Angelika Schulz Institute for Transport Studies Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) Agenda Mobility in Germany (MiD) and German Mobility Panel (MOP) in comparison Conclusion and outlook Statement of the Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development

Institute of Transport Research. German Aerospace Center (DLR) Dr. Martin Kagerbauer and Angelika Schulz Institute for Transport Studies Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) Two complementary surveys in Germany MiD (= German NTS)MOP DesignRepeated cross-sectional surveyLongitudinal panel survey  Daily travel behavior: 7 consecutive days (autumn) in 3 consecutive years  Odometer reading: all refuel processes of all car in the MOP sample (spring) in 8 weeks in three consecutive years Net sampleLarge (~ HH)Small (~ HH) FrequencyIrregular (every 6 to 8 years)Every year Contractor  Field work: infas (2002, 2008)  Scientific supervisors: DIW (2002), DLR (2008)  Field work: infratest (since 1994) infas (cohort 2003)  Scientific supervisor: KIT FundingBMVBS (Federal Ministry of Transport, Building and Urban Development)

Institute of Transport Research. German Aerospace Center (DLR) Dr. Martin Kagerbauer and Angelika Schulz Institute for Transport Studies Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) German Surveys in comparison: Net Sample Size

Institute of Transport Research. German Aerospace Center (DLR) Dr. Martin Kagerbauer and Angelika Schulz Institute for Transport Studies Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) MiD / MOP in comparison: Coverage MiDMOP Sampling frameOfficial population registryMarket research bus Sampling unit Individual person (aged ≧ 14) Household Sampling stratification  16 federal states (Bundesländer)  17 regional / community types Germany  5 regional types  4 household types  car ownership Weighting (post stratification)  5 HH sizes  7 regional types  7 weekdays / 12 months  Age / sex  4 HH sizes  3 groups car ownership  3 groups population of home location  Age / sex Respondents Up to 8 HH members aged ≧ 0Up to 5 HH members aged ≧ 10 Individual / HH reporting period  1 day (trip diary)  up to 3 journeys with overnight stay (3 months retrospectively)  1 week (trip diary)  8 weeks (odometer reading) Overall reporting period Every day of an entire year  Several weeks in autumn (HH questionnaire, trip diary)  8 weeks in spring (odometer reading)

Institute of Transport Research. German Aerospace Center (DLR) Dr. Martin Kagerbauer and Angelika Schulz Institute for Transport Studies Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) MiD / MOP in comparison: Instruments MiD 2002 *MOP since 1994 HH level  PAPI (if no phone number is available)  CATI  PAPI Person level  PAPI Trip level  PAPI MiD 2008 * HH level **  PAPI (if no phone number is available) (~ 7%)  CATI (~ 85%)  CAWI (~ 8%) Person level  CATI (100%) Trip level  CATI (100%) *proxy interview for children: mandatory below age of 10, voluntary from age 10 to 13 **HH eligible only, if at least 50% of HH members completed both person and trip interview

Institute of Transport Research. German Aerospace Center (DLR) Dr. Martin Kagerbauer and Angelika Schulz Institute for Transport Studies Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) MiD / MOP in comparison: Survey Process MiDMOP Sampling method  Random sampling with geographic stratification  Random sampling of the market research bus with geographic and household specific stratification Recruiting letter Dissemination of survey material  1 st phone call (HH interview)  mailing of HH questionnaire  Phone call (ask for participation)  Mailing of questionnaire and trip diary  Mailing of memory jogger  Reminder for trip diary  Reminder (if necessary)  2 nd phone call (individual questionnaire / trip reporting) Coding Plausibility check Basic analysis

Institute of Transport Research. German Aerospace Center (DLR) Dr. Martin Kagerbauer and Angelika Schulz Institute for Transport Studies Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) MiDMOP HHsize; type; vehicle ownership; income; phone number size; type; area/ park condition of home location; vehicle ownership and use; accessability of public transport/ of usual destinations, income Personsocio-demographics; school/ occupation; long-distance trips; accessibility of public transport/ of usual destinations; general mode choice; individual availablity of car/ bike/ public transport ticket; handicaps; weather conditions socio-demographics; school/ occupation; area of working place; parking conditions at work, individual availablity of car/ bike/ public transport ticket; handicaps Trippurpose; type of O/ D; distance; duration; mode(s); regular business trips weekday, start and end time of trip, purpose; mode(s); distance; HH carmanufacturer/ model; engine type/ power; type of registration; year of manufacture/ purchase; usual parking place; annual mileage; current odometer reading; main driver Journeypurpose; destination area; mode Odometer reading type of car (see MiD), milage, refuel process (date, odometer reading, amount, costs) MiD / MOP in comparison: Content

Institute of Transport Research. German Aerospace Center (DLR) Dr. Martin Kagerbauer and Angelika Schulz Institute for Transport Studies Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) MiD / MOP in comparison: Available material General data availability for third parties Academia, political decision makers, public authorities, planning engineers, transport providers, etc. Access is subject to prior registration MiDMOP Data sets  HH, person, trip, car, journeys  various file formats  HH, person, person per day, trip  Car (mileage/ fuel consumption)  various file formats Codebook User guide / manual Methodological report (part of the analytic report) Tabular report (part of the analytic report) Analytical report Analysis tool --- Website

Institute of Transport Research. German Aerospace Center (DLR) Dr. Martin Kagerbauer and Angelika Schulz Institute for Transport Studies Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) Options for analysis: MOP

Institute of Transport Research. German Aerospace Center (DLR) Dr. Martin Kagerbauer and Angelika Schulz Institute for Transport Studies Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) MiD / MOP: Selected results MID 2008

Institute of Transport Research. German Aerospace Center (DLR) Dr. Martin Kagerbauer and Angelika Schulz Institute for Transport Studies Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) MiD / MOP: Selected results

Institute of Transport Research. German Aerospace Center (DLR) Dr. Martin Kagerbauer and Angelika Schulz Institute for Transport Studies Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) Two survey approaches: (Dis-)Advantages Current stateAdvantage / OpportunityDisadvantage / Risk Long tradition of both surveys Consistent time series; continuous methodological development Reluctancy to change anything (content, methods) differing sampling frame Complementary coverage of different user groups Sampling bias / selectivity; comparison of incomparable Large (MiD) & small (MOP) sample Combination of continouse survey (trends) and big sample Large sample is expensive Differing reporting periodsComplementary analysis Comparison of incomparable if inadequate post-harmonisiation Differing instrumentsComplementary analysis Methodological bias; comparison of incomparable Similar concepts (e.g. trip)Complementary / parallel analysis--- Similar set of questions / variables Parallel analysis; reciprocal validation Limited comparability due to slight variations Avoidance of pre-aggregated answering options easy post-harmonisation--- Availability for third partiesjoint / comparative analyses Inaccurate data analysis in case of insufficient expertise

Institute of Transport Research. German Aerospace Center (DLR) Dr. Martin Kagerbauer and Angelika Schulz Institute for Transport Studies Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) Travel activity Respondents Many business trips? Busy people: lack of time? Many recreational trips? Immobility due to handicaps? Not interested in (travel) surveys?  In both surveys, „normal“ people are more likely to participate Data quality: Selectivity of samples Low income? High income? Many HH cars?

Institute of Transport Research. German Aerospace Center (DLR) Dr. Martin Kagerbauer and Angelika Schulz Institute for Transport Studies Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) Outlook – Methodological challenges Ongoing development and enhancement of the surveys without jeopardizing comparability with previous surveys Cautious changes with respect to applied methods and survey content Ensuring acceptable response rates Increasing refusal for different reasons Multi-method approach Adequately addressing user requirements User survey and subsequent workshop to discuss the scope of the survey in detail

Mobility surveys in Germany MiD and MOP Perspective of the funding Transport Ministry Heidrun Reuter Head of Division UI 34 Forecasts, statistics and special surveys

Motivation – Tasks of Ministry (BMVBS) Current and representative data on population, economy and mobility set the framework …  to ensure sustainable mobility for the general public  to facilitate demand-oriented and sensible transport policy Quality of transport planning, forecasts and research depends on data base for …  planning urban and transport infrastructure  political decisions  research and development, industries.  Demand-oriented, high-quality transport planning and valid forecasts require an excellent data base!

Data base and data needs Data base: official statistics  no information about private motorised and non-motorised transport. Data needs:  changes in preferences, attitudes and lifestyles make it difficult to evaluate the demand for mobility  individual mobility becomes more extensive and differentiated.  Lack of data  Approach: Close this gap

Household travel surveys: Complement to official statistics Purpose of two different household surveys (MiD / MOP):  analysis of everyday mobility of private households  monitoring of travel demand  identification of changes in mobility patterns  identification of mobility behaviour trends  Complementary analysis of demand and development of mobility trip purposes and mode choice, individual behaviour, routines and variations in everyday mobility  Both surveys have their own potential and limitations.  They complement each other and  therefore provide additional value for transport policy, planning and research

Use cases of household surveys by the Federal Ministry  Planning of investments  Reviewing transport policy  Establishing forecasts  Input for transport models  Relationship between urban development and transport  Complement for official statistics  data on private motorised and non-motorised traffic  Environmental aspects, CO 2 -emissions  Orientation for strategies of industries

KIT – University of the State of Baden-Wuerttemberg and National Research Center of the Helmholtz Association INSTITUTE FOR TRANSPORT STUDIESINSTITUTE OF TRANSPORT RESEARCH DLR – German Aerospace Center within the Helmholtz Association Dr. Martin KagerbauerAngelika Schulz Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT)German Aerospace Center ( DLR ) Institute for Transport Studies Institute of Transport Research Kaiserstraße 12Rutherfordstraße Karlsruhe Berlin