Un indicatore di qualità percepita per il trasporto pubblico urbano: analisi delle macro-aree italiane

Author/s Claudia Burlando, Enrico Ivaldi, Alfonso Camporeale
Publishing Year 2016 Issue 2016/2 Language Italian
Pages 16 P. 267-282 File size 459 KB
DOI 10.3280/ED2016-002003
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

The current model of urban mobility in Italy is heavily unbalanced in favor of individual transport. This situation is increasingly critical both in terms of private costs and external costs, both of which are higher for individual transport than for public transport. In this system based on a false perception of the private costs and on a strong indifference to external costs, it is necessary that Local Public Transport (LPT) becomes again the basis of urban mobility. With solid foundations of collective mobility, private mobility and the most recent examples of innovative mobility (car sharing, collective taxis, services on-demand, etc.) may be added. Such a path for returning the spotlight on LPT can not ignore the aspects of quality of the public service. While the use of local public transport does not require definitions nor does it result particularly hard to measure, the quality of service, instead, is a subjective and complex variable, whose definition is not unique and whose measurement is complex. In this paper we will consider both the objective and subjective aspects of the service. However, we will focus on them through user perceptions (customer based approach), taking the view that the assessment of service quality through the eyes of users is essential for the implementation of any strategy aimed at increasing (or consolidate) the use of LPT. By elaborating on the quantitative information provided by the results of the 2013 Multiscopo Istat Survey "Aspects of daily life", we will proceed to develop an indicator of the use of urban public transport, obtained by aggregation of information provided by the user satisfaction level about different aspects of the service. The survey results highlight the reasons for the limited success of LPT in Italy, by analyzing on the one hand the incorrectness of some established beliefs about the use and lack of use of public transport, and on the other suggesting to LPT companies and to Public Administrations the most effective ideas for action, thanks to a breakdown of an abstract and all-encompassing concept of quality in its individual and more precisely defined constituents. .

Keywords: Local public transport, quality, indicator

Jel codes: C43, C81, R42, R48

  1. Beirao, G., Sarsfield Cabral, J.A., Understanding attitudes towars public transport and private car: a qualitative study, in «Transport Policy», 14, pp. 478-489, 2007.
  2. Bonatti, G., Ivaldi, E., Soliani, R., Cultural, Relational and Social Participation in Italian Regions: evidences from the Italian context, in «Journal of Empirical Economics », 3, pp. 18-32, 2014.
  3. Burlando, C., Sviluppi della riforma del TPL in Italia, in «Trasporti: diritto, economia, politica», 2, pp. 10-14, 2002.
  4. Cassa Depositi e Prestiti, Mobilità Urbana, Il Trasporto Pubblico Locale: il momento di ripartire, 2013.
  5. Dasgupta, P., Weale, M., On Measuring the Quality of Life, in «World Developmentı», 20, pp. 119-131, 1992.
  6. Dell’Olio, L., Ibeas, A., Cecin, P., The quality of service desired by public t r a n s p o r t users, in «Transport Policy», 18, pp. 217-227, 2011.
  7. Dym, C.L., Wood H.W., Scott J.M., Rank ordering engineering designs: p a i r w i s e comparison charts and Borda counts, in «Research in Engeenering Design», 13, pp. 236–242, 2002.
  8. Eboli, L., Mazzulla, G., La misura della qualità dei servizi di trasporto collettivo: strumenti, metodi e modelli, Roma, Aracne Editrice, 2008.
  9. Eboli, L., Mazzulla, G., Nocera, S., Comparazione di metodi di misura della qualità dei servizi di trasporto collettivo, in (a cura di), Marcucci E., Musso E., Sostenibilità, Qualità e Sicurezza nei sistemi di trasporto e logistica, Milano, FrancoAngeli, pp. 306-310, , 2011.
  10. El-Geneidy, A., Horning, J., Krizek, K.J., Using Archived ITS Data to Improve Transit Performance and Management, Minnesota Department of Transportation Research, , 2010.
  11. Floridi, M. et al., An exercise in composite indicators construction: assessing the sustainability of Italian regions, in «Ecological Economics», 70, pp. 1440-1447, 2011.
  12. Friman, M., Implementing quality improvements in public transport, in «Journal of Public Transportation», 7, pp. 49-65, 2004.
  13. Fuji, S., Kitamura, R., What does a one-month free bus ticket do to habitual car drivers? An experimental analysis of habit and attitude change, in «Transportation», 30, pp. 81-95, 2003.
  14. Grasso, M., Una misurazione del benessere nelle regioni italiane, Working Paper Series of The Departement of Economics – University of Milan Bicocca, 41. pp. 1-24, 2002.
  15. Grasso, M., Pareglio, S., Ranking well-being in the European Union, in «Rivista Internazionale di Scienze Sociali», 2, pp. 242-263, 2007.
  16. Hall, P., Aged industrial Countries, in (a cura di), Oswalt P., Rieniets T., Atlas od shrinking cities, Hatje Cantz, Ostfildern, pp. 144-155, 2006.
  17. Hensher, D.A., Stopher, P., Bullock, P., Service quality: developing a service quality index in the provision of commercial bus contract, in «Transportation Research Part A», 37, pp. 499-517, 2003.
  18. ISFORT, 11°Rapporto sulla mobilità in Italia, 2014.
  19. Ivaldi, E., Bonatti, G., Soliani, R., The construction of a synthetic index comparing multidimensional well-being in the European Union, Social Indicators Research. January 2016, Volume 125, Issue 2, pp 397-430,
  20. 2016 Ivaldi, E., Testi, A., Socio economic conditions and health in Europe: a comparison among the 27 EU Countries, in Rowsen D.J., Eliot A.P. (a cura di), Social Inequalities, New York,, Nova Publisher pp. 127-150, 2011.
  21. Joewono, T.B., Kubota, H., User satisfaction with paratransit in competition with motorization in Indonesia: anticipation of future implications, in «Transportation», 34, pp. 337-354, 2007.
  22. Kabisch, N., Haase, D., Diversifyng european agglomerations: evidence of urban population trends for the 21st century, in «Population, Space and Place», 17, pp. 236-253, 2011.
  23. Konig, A., The reliability of the transportation system and its influence on the choice behaviour, 2nd Swiss Transport Research Conference, Ascona. Risorsa web disponibile--all’indirizzo http://www.strc.ch/conferences/2002/koenig.pdf (consultato il 21 Febbraio 2015), 2002.
  24. Lai, W., Chen, C., Behavioral intentions of public transit passengers: the role of service quality, perceived value, satisfaction and involvement, in «Transport Policy», 18, pp. 318-325, 2011.
  25. Luzzati, T., Gucciardi, G., Una classifica robusta della sostenibilità delle regioni italiane, Discussion Papers del Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche dell’Università di Pisa, n. 140, 2012.
  26. Marchant, T., Valued relations aggregation with the Borda method, in «Journal of Multicriteria Decision Analysis», 5, pp. 127-132, 1996.
  27. Marchant, T., Valued relations aggregation with the Borda method, in «European Journal of Operational Research», 178, pp. 514-529, 2007.
  28. Marcucci, E., Gatta, V., Definizione e metodi di stima della qualità nei servizi: il caso dei trasporti, in (a cura di) Venezia E., Trasporto urbano, Milano, FrancoAngeli, pp. 201-216, 2005.
  29. Musso, E., Burlando, C., Economia della mobilità urbana, Tor, Utetino, 1999.
  30. Oswalt, P., Rieniets, T., Atlas of shrinking cities, Hatje Cantz, Ostfildern, 2006.
  31. Paulley, N. et al., The demand for public transport: the effects of fares, quality of service. Income and car ownership, in «Transport Policy», 13, pp. 295-306, 2006.
  32. Petrick, J.F., The roles of quality, value and satisfaction in predicting cruise passengers behavioral intentions, in «Journal of Travel Research», 42, pp. 397-407, 2004.
  33. Qizilbash, M., Sustainable developments: concepts and rankings, in «The Journal of Development Studies», 37, pp 134-161, 2001.
  34. Roman, C., Martin, J.C., Espino, R., Using stated preferences to analyze the service quality of public transport, in «International Journal of Sustainable Transportation», 8, pp. 28-46, 2014.
  35. Saltelli, A., Composite indicators between analysis and advocacy, in «Social Indicators Research», 81, pp. 65-77, 2008.
  36. Schetke, S., Haase, D., Multi criteria assessment of socio environmental aspects in shrinking cities, in «Environmental Impact Assessment Review», 28, pp. 483-503,
  37. 2008. Tsai, C.F., Hu, Y.H., Ke, S.W.G., A Borda count approach to combine subjective and objective based Management Information System journal rankings, in «Online Information Review», 38, pp. 469-483, 2014.
  38. UN, 2012, The future we want – Resolution 66/288, New York.
  39. UN – Departement of Economic and Social Affairs, 2014, World Urbanizaton Prospect – The 2014 Revison, New York.
  40. Van Der Gaag, J., Dunkelberg, E., Misurare il benessere dell’infanzia nei Paesi del Mediterraneo: verso un indice complessivo del benessere dell’infanzia, Conferenza Mediterranea di Genova del 7-8-9 Gennaio 2004.
  41. Young, H.P., An axiomatization of Borda’s rule, in «Journal of Economic Theory», 9, pp. 43-52, 1974.

Claudia Burlando, Enrico Ivaldi, Alfonso Camporeale, Un indicatore di qualità percepita per il trasporto pubblico urbano: analisi delle macro-aree italiane in "ECONOMIA E DIRITTO DEL TERZIARIO " 2/2016, pp 267-282, DOI: 10.3280/ED2016-002003