1. Mobility Survey in Metropolitan Areas of Porto and Lisboa, 2017
Task Force on Passenger Mobility Statistics, 11 October 2018, Eurostat

2. Contents General definition Sampling and collection methods
Response rates / weighting
Main results (Eurostat indicators)
Reports and dissemination
Conclusions/highlights
Improvement opportunities
Socio-economic impact

3. Geographic scope: Population scope: Sample base:
MA Porto (NUTS III) and MA Lisboa (NUTS II and III), representing 44% of the total population of Portugal
Population scope:
Resident population in municipalities of MA Porto and MA Lisboa (aged years)
Sample base:
Dwelling central files, from last census and with further updates – only private households, excluding collective ones

4. Statistical Unit: Sampling method:
The individual, all in each dwelling within the age group
Sampling method:
Zoning study that defined homogeneous areas of mobility, grouping LAU2 units, using geo data on the accessibility to road and rail infrastructure network and also a set of statistical indicators (mainly from Census) for both MA, that supported the decision on sample size and dispersion, and ensured the representativeness of the results.

5. Collection and reference period:
Collection method:
1st stage: CAWI self response web questionnaire
2nd stage: CAPI face-to-face interviews with residents of a subset of selected households among non-respondents in the 1st stage
Collection and reference period:
Data collection - between October and December 2017
Reference period - one week day (between Monday and Sunday, previously chosen for each household – the sample was decomposed in this way), being each day considered between :00 am until 03:59 am of the next day

6. The questionnaire
Definitions adopted the recommendations of the EU guidelines on passenger mobility statistics
One model, applied both for CAWI and CAPI
Questions for:
the household (composition, private means of transport, availability of parking places),
basic individual characterization (age, sex, education, work status, public transport passes, availability of driving license and parking place at work),
trips (and its stages) beginning in the reference day,
household income groups and opinions about transports (only the main respondent).
Minimum threshold for walking: 200 meters

7. The questionnaire (cont.)
For medium/long distance destinations, it was possible to specify only the name of the locality instead of using the map
Trips abroad had no detail about places visited, but only the day of coming back
Waiting times for public transport were also recorded
Origins and destinations had tags with short names to be used lately

8. Response rate for CAWI and CAPI by region
Response rate obtained by CAWI (17.1%) exceeded the initially expected gross rate for the 1st stage
Response rate obtain in the 2nd stage by CAPI was 58.8%
Total response rate considering both methods was 20.3%
Response rate for CAWI and CAPI by region

9. Weighting: Each municipality was calibrated separately
Based on the variables:
sex with age group
total population by zone
job status
Other data sources were used to decide the best approach considering different weighting studies:
transport statistics (all public means of transport)
ticketing data bases (MA Lisboa)
population census (commuting data)

10. Share of trip-makers among respondents
Main results:
(Eurostat indicators)
Share of trip-makers among respondents
79.4%

11. Average number of trips/person/day
Main results:
(Eurostat indicators)
Average number of trips/person/day
2.74
98.8%

12. Average number of trips/person/day by main travel mode
50.0%
20.4%

13. Average number of trips/person/day by travel purpose
34.8%
19.1%

14. Average travel distance(a) per person/per day (km)
Main results:
(Eurostat indicators)
Average travel distance(a) per person/per day (km)
33.9
69.6%
(a) Km from a Google app using origin, destination, duration and main mode of transport

15. Average travel distance(b) per person/per day (km) by travel mode (stage)
49.7%
(b) Excluding aviation

16. Average travel distance per person/per day (km) by travel purpose
33.2%

17. Average travel time per person/per day (minutes)
Main results:
(Eurostat indicators)
Average travel time per person/per day (minutes)
66.9
92.5%

18. Average travel time(b) (minutes) per person/per day by travel mode (stage)
41.2%
19.9%
(b) Excluding aviation

19. Average travel time per person/per day (minutes) by travel purpose
37.5%

20. Passenger kilometers (106 pkm) for all reference population/year
Main results:
(Eurostat indicators)
Passenger kilometers (106 pkm) for all reference population/year
36,201.5
69.6%

21. Passenger car - as passenger Passenger car - as driver
Passenger kilometers (106 pkm) for all reference population/year
by main travel mode
by travel purpose
Bus and coach
Leisure
Other
Passenger car - as passenger
Personal business
Other
Passenger car - as driver
Work

22. Vehicle occupancy rate (no.)
Main results:
(Eurostat indicators)
Vehicle occupancy rate (no.)
1.58

23. Dissemination and impact of the results
Reports to Eurostat:
July 2018 – Implementation and main results
September 2018 – Technical report
Dissemination and impact of the results
Mobility Survey had a public presentation session at Statistics Portugal (before the beginning)
Press release on 2nd July 2018 revealing the main provisional results
Impacts through the media were relevant
More detailed information is being prepared for a publication possibly in November 2018

24. General conclusions:
The survey provided the production of results according to the needs of the European Statistical System and national users of different degrees of specialization in the field.
The population, generally, corresponded very well, trying to give its contribution for the correct evaluation of the public transport and usage of individual means.
Some highlights are presented in the next slides.

25. Connection with key users:
Remarks:
Complex internal organization: an interdepartmental working group and subgroups for specific topics (sampling zoning study, questionnaire design, maps within the questionnaire, public communication, the app for km, users telephone and mail support, etc)
Connection with key users:
Eurostat for conception and definitions
Local transport entities for lists of transport operators and transport services (input for combo boxes)
Innovative approach in Portugal – sampling zones, mixed collection method with emphasis on the web collection, maps inside the questionnaire to select the points of origin and destination

26. Conclusions/highlights:
Positive impact from the communication strategy (written press, radio spot, posters on the main public transport means, educational institutions , municipalities and parishes, Statistics Portugal webpage and Facebook, YouTube video, etc.)
Facebook
Poster
Banner

27. Conclusions/highlights: Questionnaire
Importance of clear and short texts with common language
Diary type-of-report (where were you at the beginning of the day? Where did you go afterwards? ….)
Help page with clarifications
Loops of stages within each trip – seemed to be complicated for some respondents

28. Conclusions/highlights:
Collection support: need for a telephone support line and
Heavy work of data validation and processing (identification of outliers, analysis of consistency of responses and imputations, estimation of distances travelled)

29. Improvement opportunities:
The survey may benefit from a simpler questionnaire (with less questions) in order to obtain additional number of transport trips and trip stages, considering that a substantial part of respondents concentrates its reports on work and school commuting
The impact of this kind survey on the public can be huge; the number of hours dedicated to users support was much higher than expected (given the huge interest of citizens in general), phone and mail support must be improved

30. Improvement opportunities:
Evaluation of a national coverage for a future survey edition, providing more in-depth results on transport modes used in areas not so well provided in terms of transport services
Consider a second model for long distance mobility, implying a specific approach
More detail on trips abroad
Evaluation of the adequate breakdown of shared vehicles (with or without driver, cars, motorcycles, scooters), while collecting data and also for dissemination
Better layout of the online questionnaire for the successive stages, so that respondents don’t  get lost, also with a time line on screen to help fulfilling

31. Socio-economic impact:
Passengers mobility theme came to public debate through the media and social nets after dissemination of Mobility Survey results
Transports became a theme frequently under debate, namely about the services available, environmental impact, cycling paths, car/motorcycle sharing systems
The debate on public transports led to governmental initiatives in order to create incentives to the use of public transport

32. Thank you for your attention
Economic Statistics Department Distributive Trade, Tourism and Transport Statistics Unit