Exploring Community Readiness to Adopt Mobility as a Service (MaaS) Scheme in the City of Thessaloniki
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- To what extent is Thessaloniki ready and suitable for the implementation of a MaaS scheme?
- What factors affect individuals’ willingness to use a MaaS scheme?
- Which factors affect individuals’ willingness to subscribe to a MaaS scheme for elderly and young family members?
- What are the stakeholders’ views vis a vis MaaS implementation?
2. Literature Review
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Study Area
3.2. Methodology
3.2.1. Citizens Survey
3.2.2. Stakeholders’ Interviews
4. Results
4.1. Citizens’ Survey
4.1.1. Descriptive Analysis
4.1.2. Inferential Statistical Analysis: Individuals Choosing a MaaS for Themselves
4.1.3. Inferential Statistical Analysis: Creating a Subscription for a MaaS Scheme for Elderly Family Members
4.1.4. Inferential Statistical Analysis: Create Subscription for a MaaS Scheme for Young Teenage Family Members
4.2. Modelling Willingness to Use a MaaS System
4.3. Stakeholders Qualitative Interviews
5. Discussion
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Li, L.; Zhu, G.; Wu, D.; Xu, H.; Ma, P.; Liu, J.; Li, Z.; He, Y.; Li, C.; Wu, P. Land Suitability Assessment for Supporting Transport Planning Based on Carrying Capacity and Construction Demand. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0246374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Papagiannakis, A.; Ntafos, K. Impact assessment of climate change on coastal transport systems in the greater Thessaloniki area. In Advances in Mobility as a Service Systems, Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Sustainable Urban Mobility, Virtual CSUM 2020, Online, Greece, 17–19 June 2020; Nathanail, E.G., Adamos, G., Karakikes, I.D., Eds.; Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; Volume 1278, pp. 751–759. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Georgouli, C.; Tronca, L.P.; Kamargianni, M.; Chaniotakis, M. How Transport and Urban Planning Priorities Have Changed during the Covid-19 Pandemic. Driving Factors of Changes and Barriers in Dealing with Crisis. J. Transp. Health 2021, 22, 101207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Le Pira, M.; Attard, M.; Ison, S.G. Urban Transport Planning and Policy in a Changing World: Bridging the Gap between Theory and Practice. Res. Transp. Bus. Manag. 2021, 39, 100634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Signor, L.; Karjalainen, P.; Kamargianni, M.; Matyas, M.; Pagoni, I.; Stefanelli, T.; Galli, G.; Malgieri, P.; Bousse, Y.; Mizaras, V.; et al. Mobility as a Service (MaaS) and Sustainable Urban Mobility Planning; ERTICO ITS, Brussels, Belgium, 2019.
- Audenhove, F.-J.V.; Arby, H.; Rominger, G.; Tauvel, M. How to Realize the Promise of Mobility-as-a-Service. Arthur D. Little’s Future of Mobility Lab. 2021. Available online: https://www.adlittle.com/sites/default/files/reports/ADL_Beyond_MaaS_Report_0.pdf (accessed on 13 June 2022).
- Russo, F.; Rindone, C. Smart City for Sustainable Development: Applied Processes from SUMP to MaaS at European Level. Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 1773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dadashzadeh, N.; Woods, L.; Ouelhadj, D.; Thomopoulos, N.; Kamargianni, M.; Antoniou, C. Mobility as a Service Inclusion Index (MaaSINI): Evaluation of Inclusivity in MaaS Systems and Policy Recommendations. Transp. Policy 2022, 127, 191–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Urban Mobility Partnership. Mobility as a Service A Practical Guide 2023. Available online: https://urbanmobilitypartnership.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/UMP-MaaS-paper-FINAL.pdf (accessed on 11 June 2024).
- Matyas, M.; Kamargianni, M. Survey Design for Exploring Demand for Mobility as a Service Plans. Transportation 2018, 46, 1525–1558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mitropoulos, L.; Kortsari, A.; Mizaras, V.; Ayfantopoulou, G. Mobility as a Service (MaaS) Planning and Implementation: Challenges and Lessons Learned. Future Transp. 2023, 3, 498–518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cisterna, C.; Madani, N.; Bandiera, C.; Viti, F.; Cools, M. MaaS Modelling: A Review of Factors, Customers’ Profiles, Choices and Business Models. Eur. Transp. Res. Rev. 2023, 15, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wolf, S. Defining Mobility-as-a-Service: Its Benefits, Challenges and Sustainable Potential. Available online: https://www.intelligenttransport.com/transport-articles/151320/defining-mobility-as-a-service-its-benefits-challenges-sustainable-potential/ (accessed on 18 April 2024).
- Alyavina, E.; Nikitas, A.; Njoya, E.T. Mobility-as-a-Service and Unsustainable Travel Behaviour: Exploring the Car Ownership and Public Transport Trip Replacement Side-Effects of the MaaS Paradigm. Transp. Policy 2024, 150, 53–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kant, P.; Machavarapu, P.K.; Gajjar, H. Assessment of Drivers and Barriers in the Adoption of Mobility as a Service (MaaS): A Case Study of Noida, India. Urban Plan. Transp. Res. 2023, 11, 2247044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Labee, P.; Rasouli, S.; Liao, F. The Implications of Mobility as a Service for Urban Emissions. Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ. 2022, 102, 103128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dimitriou, D.; Sartzetaki, M.; Roumboutsos, A.; Polydoropoulou, A.; Pagoni, I.; Tsirimpa, A. Transport Trends and Economics 2018–2019: Mobility as a Service; United Nations: Geneva, Switzerland, 2020; ISBN 978-92-1-004785-2. [Google Scholar]
- Ho, C.Q.; Hensher, D.A.; Mulley, C.; Wong, Y.Z. Potential Uptake and Willingness-to-Pay for Mobility as a Service (MaaS): A Stated Choice Study. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2018, 117, 302–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huhtala-Jenks, K. Whim by MaaS Global MaaS—Development and Business Models. MaaS Alliance 2019. Available online: https://maas-alliance.eu/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2019/06/MaaS-of-the-Month-Whim-Final.pdf (accessed on 11 June 2024).
- Experience the Seamless Way to Move Around. Available online: https://whimapp.com/ (accessed on 19 November 2021).
- Intelligent Transport MaaS Global, Creator of Whim App, Acquired by Umob Following Bankruptcy. Available online: https://www.intelligenttransport.com/transport-news/180138/maas-global-whim-app-umob/ (accessed on 19 April 2024).
- Mobilleo Mobilleo Case Study: TfGM Works in Partnership with Mobilleo to Power Its IMOVE Maas Solution for Greater Manchester. Available online: https://www.mobilleo.com/case-studies/tfgm-imove/ (accessed on 11 June 2024).
- eMaaS. Available online: https://emaasproject.gr/?lang=el&page=home (accessed on 19 April 2024).
- Jang, S.; Caiati, V.; Rasouli, S.; Timmermans, H.; Choi, K. Does MaaS Contribute to Sustainable Transportation? A Mode Choice Perspective. Int. J. Sustain. Transp. 2021, 15, 351–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Feneri, A.-M.; Rasouli, S.; Timmermans, H.J.P. Modeling the Effect of Mobility-as-a-Service on Mode Choice Decisions. Transp. Lett. 2020, 14, 324–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tsouros, I.; Tsirimpa, A.; Pagoni, I.; Polydoropoulou, A. MaaS Users: Who They Are and How Much They Are Willing-to-Pay. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2021, 148, 470–480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Papaioannou, G.; Polydoropoulou, A.; Tsirimpa, A.; Pagoni, I. Development of Mobility as a Service (MaaS) for Intercity Travel & Rural/Island Areas: The Case Study of Greece. Eur. Transp. Res. Rev. 2023, 15, 48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bahamonde-Birke, F.J.; Frowijn, L.; Van Gils, C.; Helmink, R.D.W.; Henkus, S.; Van Der Hoeven, S.; Mathilde Kolkman, O.; Van Onzen, T.; Ronteltap, L.; Wehl, D.E.; et al. Am I Willing to Replace My Car with a MaaS Subscription? An Analysis of the Willingness of Dutch Citizens to Adopt MaaS and the Triggers Affecting Their Choices. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2023, 176, 103816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van’t Veer, R.; Annema, J.A.; Araghi, Y.; Homem De Almeida Correia, G.; Van Wee, B. Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS): A Latent Class Cluster Analysis to Identify Dutch Vehicle Owners’ Use Intention. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2023, 169, 103608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nikiforiadis, A.; Tsavdari, D.; Mizaras, V.; Ayfantopoulou, G. Identifying Barriers and Expectations in MaaS: Users’ and Stakeholders’ Perspective. Future Transp. 2023, 3, 1240–1252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Daniela, A.-M.; Juan Carlos, G.-P.; Javier, G. On the Path to Mobility as a Service: A MaaS-Checklist for Assessing Existing MaaS-like Schemes. Transp. Lett. 2023, 15, 142–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kriswardhana, W.; Esztergár-Kiss, D. Exploring the Aspects of MaaS Adoption Based on College Students’ Preferences. Transp. Policy 2023, 136, 113–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Farahmand, Z.H.; Gkiotsalitis, K.; Geurs, K.T. Mobility-as-a-Service as a Transport Demand Management Tool: A Case Study among Employees in the Netherlands. Case Stud. Transp. Policy 2021, 9, 1615–1629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lopez-Carreiro, I.; Monzon, A.; Lopez-Lambas, M.E. Comparison of the Willingness to Adopt MaaS in Madrid (Spain) and Randstad (The Netherlands) Metropolitan Areas. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2021, 152, 275–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mulley, C.; Nelson, J.D.; Wright, S.D. Mobility as a Service for the Older Population: A Transport Solution to Land Use Changes in Essential Services? Aust. Key Cent. Transp. Logist. Manag 2017. Available online: https://ses.library.usyd.edu.au/handle/2123/19114 (accessed on 11 June 2024).
- Li, Y.; Cook, S.; May, A. Understanding the Exclusion Issues of Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS): The Potential Problems of Older Travellers’ Involvement. In Human Aspects of IT for the Aged Population. Technology and Society; Gao, Q., Zhou, J., Eds.; Lecture Notes in Computer Science; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; Volume 12209, pp. 269–287. ISBN 978-3-030-50231-7. [Google Scholar]
- Casadó, R.G.; Golightly, D.; Laing, K.; Palacin, R.; Todd, L. Children, Young People and Mobility as a Service: Opportunities and Barriers for Future Mobility. Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect. 2020, 4, 100107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lopez-Carreiro, I.; Monzon, A.; Lopez, E. MaaS Implications in the Smart City: A Multi-Stakeholder Approach. Sustainability 2023, 15, 10832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fenton, P.; Chimenti, G.; Kanda, W. The Role of Local Government in Governance and Diffusion of Mobility-as-a-Service: Exploring the Views of MaaS Stakeholders in Stockholm. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2020, 63, 2554–2576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Caballini, C.; Olivari, E.; Gasparini, C.; Dalla Chiara, B. The Spread of MaaS Initiatives in Europe: The Leading Role of Public Governance Emerging from an Italian Regional Application. Sustainability 2023, 15, 13413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Papagiannakis, A.; Vitopoulou, A.; Yiannakou, A. Transit-Oriented Development in the Southern European City of Thessaloniki Introducing Urban Railway: Typology and Implementation Issues. Eur. Plan. Stud. 2021, 29, 117–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tsamtzi, D.; Papagiannakis, A. In Search of Sustainable Urban Mobility: The Citizens’ Opinion on Key Elements of a Sustainable Urban Transport Plan for Thessaloniki. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Transport Research, Thessaloniki, Greece, 28–30 May 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Hellenic Statistical Authority. Census Results of Population and Housing ELSTAT 2021 19.07.2022; ELSTAT: Moschato, Greece, 2022. [Google Scholar]
- Saliara, K. Public Transport Integration: The Case Study of Thessaloniki, Greece. Transp. Res. Procedia 2014, 4, 535–552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ayfantopoulou, G.; Kotoula, C.M.; Morfoulaki, M.; Spandou, M.; Hatziathanasiou, M.; Zourna, M.; Theodoridou, S.; Avramidou, E.; Parthenopoulou, S.; Chelidoni, K. Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan of Thessaloniki 2022. Available online: https://www.svakthess.imet.gr/Portals/0/Deliverables/PARADOTEO_P5_SVAK_THESSALONIKI.pdf (accessed on 11 June 2024).
- Perra, V.-M.; Sdoukopoulos, A.; Pitsiava-Latinopoulou, M. Evaluation of Sustainable Urban Mobility in the City of Thessaloniki. Transp. Res. Procedia 2017, 24, 329–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- OSETH 2019 Annual Report. Available online: https://oseth.com.gr (accessed on 11 June 2024).
- Amprasi, V.; Politis, I.; Nikiforiadis, A.; Basbas, S. Comparing the Microsimulated Pedestrian Level of Service with the Users’ Perception: The Case of Thessaloniki, Greece, Coastal Front. Transp. Res. Procedia 2020, 45, 572–579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gkavra, R.; Nalmpantis, D.; Genitsaris, E.; Naniopoulos, A. Τhe Walkability of Thessaloniki: Citizens’ Perceptions. In Data Analytics: Paving the Way to Sustainable Urban Mobility, Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Sustainable Urban Mobility (CSUM2018), Skiathos Island, Greece, 24–25 May 2018; Nathanail, E.G., Karakikes, I.D., Eds.; Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; Volume 879, ISBN 978-3-030-02304-1. [Google Scholar]
- Elliniko Metro. Progress of the Thessaloniki Metro Project. Available online: https://www.emetro.gr/?page_id=18048 (accessed on 20 April 2024).
- Ko, E.; Kwon, Y.; Son, W.; Kim, J.; Kim, H. Factors Influencing Intention to Use Mobility as a Service: Case Study of Gyeonggi Province, Korea. Sustainability 2021, 14, 218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alyavina, E.; Nikitas, A.; Tchouamou Njoya, E. Mobility as a Service and Sustainable Travel Behaviour: A Thematic Analysis Study. Transp. Res. Part F Traffic Psychol. Behav. 2020, 73, 362–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fioreze, T.; de Gruijter, M.; Geurs, K. On the Likelihood of Using Mobility-as-a-Service: A Case Study on Innovative Mobility Services among Residents in the Netherlands. Case Stud. Transp. Policy 2019, 7, 790–801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ye, J.; Zheng, J.; Yi, F. A Study on Users’ Willingness to Accept Mobility as a Service Based on UTAUT Model. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2020, 157, 120066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Variable | Variable Category | Number of Respondents | % Respondents |
---|---|---|---|
Gender | Women | 235 | 59.50% |
Men | 151 | 38.20% | |
I do not wish to specify | 9 | 2.30% | |
Age | <18 | 5 | 1.30% |
18–24 | 43 | 10.90% | |
25–34 | 116 | 29.4% | |
35–44 | 97 | 24.60% | |
45–54 | 82 | 20.80% | |
55–66 | 44 | 11.10% | |
>64 | 8 | 3.00% | |
Education | Elementary school | 1 | 0.30% |
Gymnasium | 5 | 1.30% | |
High school | 60 | 15.20% | |
Technical Vocational School | 50 | 12.70% | |
Undergraduate degree | 153 | 38.70% | |
Master’s degree—PhD | 126 | 31.90% | |
Occupation | State employee | 85 | 21.50% |
Private employee | 152 | 38.50% | |
Freelancer | 65 | 16.50% | |
School Student | 6 | 1.50% | |
University Student | 45 | 11.40% | |
Retired | 16 | 4.10% | |
Homemaker | 8 | 2.00% | |
Unemployed | 18 | 4.60% | |
Individuals’ income | 0–500 | 88 | 22.30% |
501–1000 | 145 | 36.70% | |
1001–1500 | 92 | 23.30% | |
1501–2000 | 36 | 9.10% | |
2001–2500 | 15 | 3.80% | |
>2500 | 19 | 4.80% | |
Household members | 1 | 68 | 17.20% |
2 | 92 | 23.30% | |
3 | 86 | 21.80% | |
4 | 109 | 27.60% | |
5+ | 40 | 10.10% | |
Children in the household | 0 | 198 | 50.10% |
1 | 69 | 17.50% | |
2 | 95 | 24.10% | |
3 | 24 | 6.10% | |
4 | 7 | 1.80% | |
5 | 2 | 0.50% | |
Disability | Yes | 7 | 1.80% |
No | 388 | 98.20% | |
Family member with disability | Yes | 27 | 6.80% |
No | 368 | 93.20% | |
Lived Abroad | Yes | 115 | 29.10% |
No | 280 | 70.90% | |
Area of residency | Thessaloniki City center | 174 | 44.10% |
Outside of city center | 221 | 55.90% | |
Urban/Suburbs | Urban | 374 | 95.00% |
Suburbs | 21 | 5.00% | |
Sum | 395 | 100% |
Variables | M | Median | SD | IQR |
---|---|---|---|---|
Frequency of trips on foot | 4.81 | 5 | 1.21 | 2 |
Frequency of trips by car as a driver | 3.97 | 5 | 2.17 | 5 |
Frequency of trips by car as a passenger | 3.78 | 4 | 1.44 | 3 |
Frequency of trips by buses | 3.06 | 3 | 1.71 | 2 |
Frequency of trips by taxis | 2.58 | 2 | 1.27 | 1 |
Frequency of trips by motorbike | 1.81 | 1 | 1.48 | 1 |
Frequency of trips by bicycle | 1.7 | 1 | 1.31 | 1 |
Frequency of trips by e-scooters | 1.21 | 1 | 0.71 | 0 |
Variables | M | Median | SD | IQR |
---|---|---|---|---|
Car | ||||
A car provides independence and autonomy | 5.31 | 6 | 0.84 | 1 |
A car is comfortable | 5.30 | 5 | 0.81 | 1 |
A car is a reliable transport mode | 4.98 | 5 | 0.92 | 1 |
I would consider giving up my car if I was provided with a stable, reliable, and comfortable transportation to my work | 4.84 | 5 | 1.45 | 2 |
A car is a safe transport mode | 4.69 | 5 | 1.01 | 1 |
I may not use a car due to lack of parking spaces | 4.56 | 5 | 1.37 | 2 |
It would be more possible to commute with another mode for non-work-related activities. | 4.11 | 4 | 1.5 | 2 |
Car characterizes me | 3.34 | 4 | 1.63 | 3 |
Car is economical | 3.16 | 3 | 1.24 | 2 |
Car has environmental benefits | 2.11 | 2 | 1.17 | 2 |
Bus | ||||
I don’t feel comfortable using the bus due to overcrowding | 5.22 | 6 | 1.23 | 1 |
Frequency is an inhibiting factor to using public bus | 5.09 | 6 | 1.28 | 1 |
Bus is an economical transport mode | 4.49 | 5 | 1.27 | 1 |
Bus has environmental benefits | 4.26 | 4 | 1.4 | 1 |
I used to commute more with bus, but now avoid their use due to COVID-19 | 4.13 | 4 | 1.77 | 3 |
Bus provides safe transportation | 3.52 | 4 | 1.48 | 3 |
Bus is a reliable transport mode | 2.72 | 3 | 1.38 | 2 |
Bus provides independence and autonomy | 2.22 | 2 | 1.28 | 2 |
Bus is comfortable | 2.02 | 2 | 1.07 | 2 |
Bicycle | ||||
Bicycling brings environmental benefits | 5.63 | 6 | 0.91 | 0 |
Bicycling is economical | 5.59 | 6 | 0.86 | 1 |
Bicycle provides independence and autonomy | 4.91 | 5 | 1.24 | 2 |
Bicycle is a reliable transport mode | 3.92 | 4 | 1.5 | 2 |
Bicycle is comfortable | 3.11 | 3 | 1.33 | 2 |
Today, I use bicycle more due to COVID-19 | 2.49 | 2 | 1.75 | 3 |
Bicycle provides safe transportation | 2.44 | 2 | 1.18 | 2 |
E-scooter | ||||
E-scooter use has environmental benefits | 4.61 | 5 | 1.31 | 2 |
E-scooter provides independence and autonomy | 4.32 | 5 | 1.42 | 1 |
E-scooter is an economical mode of transportation | 3.84 | 4 | 1.44 | 2 |
E-scooter is a reliable mode of transportation | 3.1 | 3 | 1.46 | 2 |
E-scooter is comfortable | 2.57 | 3 | 1.34 | 3 |
Today, I use e-scooter more due to COVID-19 | 1.91 | 2 | 1.04 | 1 |
E-scooter provides safe transportation | 1.99 | 1 | 1.52 | 2 |
Walking | ||||
Walking is good for my health | 5.8 | 6 | 0.52 | 0 |
Walking has environmental benefits | 5.69 | 6 | 0.8 | 0 |
Walking provides independence and autonomy | 5.13 | 6 | 1.18 | 2 |
Walking is a safe mode of transportation | 5.12 | 5 | 0.98 | 1 |
Today, I walk more due to COVID-19 | 4.79 | 5 | 1.54 | 2 |
Variable | % Respondents |
---|---|
Cost | 27.80% |
Trial | 11.40% |
Nothing could make me use a MaaS system | 11.00% |
Unlimited trips with simultaneous access to multiple modes | 10.10% |
Comfort | 7.80% |
Environmental Benefits | 4.60% |
Flexibility | 3.80% |
Time saving | 3.30% |
Additional Amenities | 3.30% |
Absence of alternatives | 2.30% |
Easiness of trips | 2.00% |
Independence | 1.80% |
Innovation | 1.80% |
Safety | 1.50% |
Accessibility | 1.50% |
Reliability | 1.30% |
Reduction of car use | 1.30% |
Other | 3.60% |
Variable | Mean |
---|---|
Unlimited access to Taxi services | 3.92 |
Bonuses (e.g., meals, tickets) | 3.76 |
Access to a car for distance up to 50 km | 3.71 |
Access to a car for distance from 50 to 100 km | 3.70 |
Access to a car for distance for more than 100 km | 3.69 |
Unlimited PT | 3.49 |
Trust a private company for Public Transit | 3.35 |
Unlimited access to bike-sharing and e-scooter sharing | 3.30 |
Mean Rank | N | U | Z | p-Value | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Variables | Peoples’ Willingness to Use a MaaS System | |||||
Gender | Woman | 202.37 | 235 | 15,659.00 | −2.293 | 0.02 |
Man | 179.70 | 151 | ||||
Driving License | Yes | 206.34 | 298 | 11,967.00 | −2.979 | 0.003 |
No | 172.37 | 97 | ||||
Prior Knowledge of MaaS | Yes | 227.35 | 96 | 11,534.00 | −3.389 | 0.001 |
No | 188.58 | 299 | ||||
Used MaaS in the past | Yes | 256.45 | 41 | 4860.50 | −4.053 | 0.000 |
No | 191.23 | 354 |
Peoples’ Willingness to Use a MaaS System | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Variables | Mean Rank | N | Chi-Square | p-Value | |
Transport mode for work commuting | Car driver | 184.46 | 189 | 20.361 | 0.02 |
Car as passenger | 248.08 | 43 | |||
Public Bus | 216.32 | 77 | |||
Taxi | 222.29 | 7 | |||
Motorcycle | 171.28 | 20 | |||
Bicycle | 187.63 | 8 | |||
Walking | 187.07 | 51 | |||
Transport mode for educational trips | Car driver | 180.68 | 164 | 22.906 | 0.001 |
Car as passenger | 246.91 | 29 | |||
Public Bus | 225.43 | 79 | |||
Taxi | 190.45 | 11 | |||
Motorcycle | 150.12 | 17 | |||
Bicycle | 196.90 | 10 | |||
Walking | 199.92 | 85 | |||
Transport mode for leisure trips | Car driver | 177.88 | 165 | 28.962 | 0.000 |
Car as passenger | 225.93 | 70 | |||
Public Bus | 226.05 | 46 | |||
Taxi | 252.17 | 24 | |||
Motorcycle | 162.94 | 16 | |||
Bicycle | 145.45 | 10 | |||
Walking | 195.81 | 64 | |||
Frequency of commuting my PT | Never | 169.61 | 87 | 23.608 | 0.000 |
<1 day/week | 181.36 | 104 | |||
1–2 days/week | 208.22 | 53 | |||
2–3 days/week | 210.97 | 54 | |||
3–4 days/week | 244.27 | 45 | |||
Age | <18 | 199.70 | 5 | 14.277 | 0.027 |
18–24 | 211.45 | 43 | |||
25–34 | 214.46 | 116 | |||
35–44 | 196.43 | 97 | |||
45–54 | 185.71 | 82 | |||
55–64 | 185.49 | 44 | |||
>64 | 99.81 | 8 | |||
After COVID-19 I would consider switching to a new transport mode | Absolutely disagree | 173.03 | 55 | 12.031 | 0.034 |
Strongly disagree | 156.21 | 26 | |||
Disagree a bit | 198.97 | 48 | |||
Somewhat agree | 199.52 | 81 | |||
Totally agree | 204.24 | 87 | |||
Strongly Agree | 215.83 | 98 | |||
The weather affects my modal choice | Absolutely disagree | 133.00 | 11 | 11.492 | 0.042 |
Strongly disagree | 185.98 | 25 | |||
Disagree a bit | 185.16 | 25 | |||
Somewhat agree | 177.48 | 66 | |||
Totally agree | 209.18 | 134 | |||
Strongly Agree | 206.90 | 134 | |||
I can positively impact the environment with my transport choices. | Absolutely disagree | 230.50 | 8 | 18.985 | 0.002 |
Strongly disagree | 152.79 | 7 | |||
Disagree a bit | 169.84 | 19 | |||
Somewhat agree | 164.73 | 86 | |||
Totally agree | 205.99 | 117 | |||
Strongly Agree | 213.94 | 158 |
Willingness to Create a MaaS Subscription for the Elderly | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Variables | Mean Rank | N | U | Z | p-Value | |
Gender | Woman | 202.77 | 235 | 15563 | −2.269 | 0.023 |
Man | 179.07 | 151 | ||||
Trip Cost | Yes | 190.11 | 271 | 14663 | −2.253 | 0.024 |
No | 215.25 | 124 |
Variables | Mean Rank | N | Chi-Square | p-Value | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Frequency of commuting as car passenger | Never | 112.25 | 18 | 25.004 | 0.000 |
<1 day/week | 170.22 | 84 | |||
1–2 days/week | 198.87 | 52 | |||
2–3 days/week | 211.21 | 105 | |||
3–4 days/week | 211.06 | 85 | |||
5+ days/week | 224.17 | 51 | |||
Frequency of commuting by bus | Never | 170.33 | 87 | 11.316 | 0.45 |
<1 day/week | 200.38 | 104 | |||
1–2 days/week | 197.06 | 53 | |||
2–3 days/week | 204.26 | 54 | |||
3–4 days/week | 230.40 | 45 | |||
5+ days/week | 205.97 | 52 |
Variables | Mean Rank | N | U | Z | p-Value | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Used MaaS in the past | Yes | 230.98 | 41 | 5905 | −2.165 | 0.030 |
No | 194.18 | 354 | ||||
PT commuters for shopping activities | Yes | 217.69 | 68 | 9779 | −1.733 | 0.083 |
No | 193.91 | 327 | ||||
Private car ownership | Yes | 181.18 | 135 | 15,279.50 | −2.338 | 0.019 |
No | 206.73 | 260 | ||||
The frequency of city buses routes is an inhibiting factor in using them | Yes | 201.91 | 348 | 6819 | −2.05 | 0.04 |
No | 169.09 | 47 |
Variable | Reference Category | B | S.E. | Wald | df | Sig. | Exp(B) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Constant | 1.031 | 1.517 | 0.462 | 1 | 0.497 | 2.804 | |
Time spent of urban trips. | More than 2 h | 7.980 | 4 | 0.092 | |||
Less than 10 min | 1.343 | 0.763 | 3.100 | 1 | 0.078 | 3.830 | |
10 to 30 min | 1.282 | 0.757 | 2.869 | 1 | 0.090 | 3.602 | |
30 to 60 min | 1.420 | 0.740 | 3.686 | 1 | 0.055 | 4.139 | |
1 to 2 h | 2.160 | 0.805 | 7.200 | 1 | 0.007 | 8.675 | |
Trip frequency as a car passenger | 5+days/ week | 15.480 | 5 | 0.008 | |||
Never | −2.246 | 0.770 | 8.515 | 1 | 0.004 | 0.106 | |
<1 day/week | −1.664 | 0.584 | 8.105 | 1 | 0.004 | 0.189 | |
1–2 days/week | −1.558 | 0.612 | 6.482 | 1 | 0.011 | 0.211 | |
2–3 days/week | −1.219 | 0.568 | 4.611 | 1 | 0.032 | 0.296 | |
3–4 days/week | −0.492 | 0.579 | 0.721 | 1 | 0.396 | 0.611 | |
Avoiding using public busses compared to the past use due to COVID-19 | I completely agree | 14.273 | 5 | 0.014 | |||
Completely disagree | −0.786 | 0.419 | 3.519 | 1 | 0.061 | 0.455 | |
I disagree a lot | −0.256 | 0.474 | 0.292 | 1 | 0.589 | 0.774 | |
I disagree a little | 0.222 | 0.493 | 0.202 | 1 | 0.653 | 1.249 | |
I agree a little | −0.535 | 0.392 | 1.862 | 1 | 0.172 | 0.586 | |
I agree a lot | 1.148 | 0.512 | 5.038 | 1 | 0.025 | 3.152 | |
Previous experience on MaaS system (Yes) | No | 1.541 | 0.728 | 4.485 | 1 | 0.034 | 4.668 |
Trusting the private sector for the operation of public transport | I completely agree | 17.141 | 5 | 0.004 | |||
Completely disagree | −3.044 | 1.165 | 6.828 | 1 | 0.009 | 0.048 | |
I disagree a lot | −2.124 | 1.172 | 3.283 | 1 | 0.070 | 0.120 | |
I disagree a little | −2.291 | 1.152 | 3.950 | 1 | 0.047 | 0.101 | |
I agree a little | −2.222 | 1.149 | 3.742 | 1 | 0.053 | 0.108 | |
I agree a lot | −0.997 | 1.207 | 0.683 | 1 | 0.409 | 0.369 | |
Age | >55 | 7.773 | 5 | 0.169 | |||
<18 | 0.592 | 1.337 | 0.196 | 1 | 0.658 | 1.807 | |
from 18 to 24 | 1.154 | 0.573 | 4.053 | 1 | 0.044 | 3.171 | |
from 25 to 34 | 1.230 | 0.487 | 6.385 | 1 | 0.012 | 3.422 | |
from 35 to 44 | 1.067 | 0.456 | 5.478 | 1 | 0.019 | 2.906 | |
from 45 to 54 | 1.000 | 0.467 | 4.585 | 1 | 0.032 | 2.718 | |
Family members | 5 and more members | 6.313 | 4 | 0.177 | |||
1 member | 1.310 | 0.577 | 5.164 | 1 | 0.023 | 3.708 | |
2 members | 0.337 | 0.505 | 0.444 | 1 | 0.505 | 1.400 | |
3 members | 0.494 | 0.501 | 0.974 | 1 | 0.324 | 1.639 | |
4 members | 0.438 | 0.482 | 0.827 | 1 | 0.363 | 1.550 | |
Driving License (Yes) | No | 0.591 | 0.304 | 3.774 | 1 | 0.052 | 1.805 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Mavrogenidou, P.; Papagiannakis, A. Exploring Community Readiness to Adopt Mobility as a Service (MaaS) Scheme in the City of Thessaloniki. Urban Sci. 2024, 8, 69. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci8020069
Mavrogenidou P, Papagiannakis A. Exploring Community Readiness to Adopt Mobility as a Service (MaaS) Scheme in the City of Thessaloniki. Urban Science. 2024; 8(2):69. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci8020069
Chicago/Turabian StyleMavrogenidou, Panagiota, and Apostolos Papagiannakis. 2024. "Exploring Community Readiness to Adopt Mobility as a Service (MaaS) Scheme in the City of Thessaloniki" Urban Science 8, no. 2: 69. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci8020069