Transport Research Centre
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid TRANSPORT RESEARCH CENTRE Centro de Investigación del Transporte SOCIAL DRIVERS OF GENDER-BASED MOBILITY PATTERNS IN MADRID. By Andrés Monzón, Cristina Valdés and Geng Xue TRANSyT WORKING PAPER RESEARCH SERIES 2008-02 EN SOCIAL DRIVERS OF GENDER-BASED MOBILITY PATTERNS IN 1 MADRID Andrés Monzón: Professor of Transport. Universidad Politécnica de Madrid. Cristina Valdés: Doctorate Researcher, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid. Geng Xue: Researcher from Beijing University of Technology. TWP-2008-02-EN 1 Cite as: Monzón, A., Valdés, C. and Xue, G. “Social Drivers of Gender‐Based Mobility Patterns In Madrid”. TRANSyT Working Paper 2008‐02‐EN. Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Spain. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 OBJECTIVES ....................................................................................................................................... 2 2 MADRID REGION AND ITS DEMOGRAPHIC AND MOBILITY TRENDS ................................................ 2 2.1 Population ............................................................................................................................................... 2 2.2 General mobility trends in the Madrid Region ....................................................................................... 2 2.3 Zonification ............................................................................................................................................. 3 3 GENERAL MOBILITY: DIFFERENCES BY GENDER ............................................................................. 5 3.1 Car availability and use ........................................................................................................................... 5 3.2 Trip purpose ............................................................................................................................................ 5 3.3 General characteristics ........................................................................................................................... 6 3.4 Working trips .......................................................................................................................................... 7 4 GENDER‐BASED MODAL SPLIT .......................................................................................................... 9 4.1 All‐purpose trips ..................................................................................................................................... 9 4.2 Working trips ........................................................................................................................................ 12 4.3 Comparison between total trips and working trips .............................................................................. 15 5 LOCATION AND WORKING TRIP CHARACTERISTICS ........................................................................ 16 5.1 Trips inside macrozones ........................................................................................................................ 16 5.2 Private car use ...................................................................................................................................... 18 5.3 Working trip distance ............................................................................................................................ 20 6 ECONOMIC LEVEL AND CAR USE ..................................................................................................... 22 7 MOBILITY PATTERNS AND NATIONALITY ......................................................................................... 24 7.1 Trip purpose .......................................................................................................................................... 24 7.2 Gender‐based modal split differences ............................................................................................... 24 8 GENERAL RESULTS ........................................................................................................................... 26 8.1 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................................... 26 8.2 Gender‐based mobility drivers ............................................................................................................. 27 1 1 OBJECTIVES Mobility patterns in the Madrid Region have experienced considerable changes over the past decade. There are two main causes for this: population growth and urban sprawl. Analyses have been carried out, targeted to explain these changes and their consequences for public transport and car-oriented demand in each part of the region. Most of these studies however make aggregated analyses of different mobility issues. This report attempts to look at mobility in the Madrid Region from a different angle. We attempt to analyse the differences between women and men, whether they use the same transport modes, whether their trips have the same characteristics, etc. After a general analysis of gender-based mobility, we focus our analysis on working trips, where differences are higher because women and men have different roles in our society. Finally we complete the study with a brief analysis of gender-based mobility patterns among foreign travellers in the Madrid Region. 2 MADRID REGION AND ITS DEMOGRAPHIC AND MOBILITY TRENDS 2.1 Population Madrid is experiencing a rapid population growth as shown in the following figures. This growth has been associated with a substantial suburbanisation process that has had a powerful influence on mobility patterns (length and number of trips) and car dependence. Graph 1 Population evolution and distribution in the Madrid Region 6.000.0006,000,000 350.110350,110 241,635 241.635 190190.026,026 5,000,0005.000.000 2,354,8852.354.885 4,000,0004.000.000 1,613,5061.613.506 1,913,8041.913.804 CBD 3,000,0003.000.000 2,000,0002.000.000 3,102,8463.102.846 3,099,8343.099.834 2,866,8502.866.850 1,000,0001.000.000 0 1988 1996 2004 2.2 General mobilityMadrid trends City in theMetropolitan Madrid RegionRing Regional Ring Two decades ago there was a clear predominance of public transport patronage in motorised trips. The population trends expressed in the previous section have produced two effects: the steady growth in the number of daily trips and the increasing use of cars, which now account for about the same amount of trips as Public Transport (PT). 2 Graph 2 Mobility Trends in the Madrid Region Trips (000) Motorised Daily Trips in Working Days 6,000 PT car 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 1988 1996 2004 The modal split depends to a great extent on population density. Public transport patronage is very good (over 50%) in central areas while it is much lower in the periphery. Graph 3 Mobility Patterns in Different Zones of the Madrid Region Modal Split in the Madrid Region (2004) 100% 90% 80% 36% 50% 70% 63% 60% 72% 50% 40% 30% 64% 50% 20% 37% 10% 28% 0% Madrid City Metropolitan Regional Ring Total Madrid Ring Region Public Transport Car 2.3 Zonification The mobility data given have been extracted from the Madrid Mobility Survey 2004 conducted by the Consorcio Regional de Transportes of the Madrid Region 2 . They have been aggregated by municipalities (179) and Madrid City districts (21) to make a total of 200 zones. However, it is necessary to use another zoning system for analysing trip distances and location of workplaces, known as macrozones. The macrozones have been formed by aggregating the 200 zones into 21 macrozones corresponding to the three rings of Madrid and their intersection with the eight radial corridors (see Fig. 1). Other analyses are related to the different rings of the Madrid Region, as shown in Graph 1. 2 The authors are very grateful to the Mobility Unit of the Consorcio Regional de Transportes for the data provided and its continuous support. 3 Macrozones in Madrid Code Macrozones Rings 1 Madrid Centre Madrid CBD 2 Madrid North 3 Madrid East Ring I: Madrid City 4 Madrid South 5 Madrid West 6 Metropolitan M-607 corridor (Colmenar) 7 Metropolitan A-1 corridor (N-1) 8 Metropolitan A-2 corridor (Henares) 9 Metropolitan A-3 corridor (N-III) Ring II: 10 Metropolitan A-4 corridor (N-IV) Metropolitan 11 Metropolitan A-42 corridor (Fuenlabrada) 12 Metropolitan A-5 corridor (N-V) 13 Metropolitan A-6 corridor (N-VI) 14 Regional M-607 corridor (Colmenar) 15 Regional A-1 corridor (North) 16 Regional A-2 corridor (Henares) 17 Regional A-3 corridor (N-III) Ring III: Regional 18 Regional A-4 corridor (N-IV) 19 Regional A-42 corridor (Fuenlabrada) 20 Regional A-5 corridor (N-V) 21 Regional A-6 corridor (N-VI) 5 3 GENERAL MOBILITY: DIFFERENCES BY GENDER 3.1 Car availability and use As shown in the graph, 70% of men hold a car driving licence, which is 16% higher than in the case of women. A total of 72% of women do not use a car even if they hold a driving licence. At the same time, 43% of men use cars, meaning that men have double the access to car use than women, 37 versus 19 per cent. Graph 4 Driving licence and car use Driving licence and car use 75% 70% 60% 54% 43% 45% 37% 28% 30% 19% 15% 0% Car driving licence Car use among Car use among total driving licenceholders population Men Women 3.2 Trip purpose There are considerable differences between genders in trip purpose. The proportion of working trips for men is 17% higher than for women. On the other hand, women make more trips for shopping and accompanying another person. This just proves women spend more trips on family-based