Possibilities to Use Existing Data Sources to Replace Traditional Travel Survey Methods
MetadataShow full item record
In Norway, travel surveys are done with a declining response rate. In addition to decreased participation, the reported trips are likely to be over- and underreported. The purpose of this paper is to investigate if emerging methods could overcome these limitations, either with supplementing or replacing paper-based traditional travel surveys. This study has limitations regarding trip segment analysis. As in the traditional survey, trips over 100 km are excluded. Travel registration diaries was not sent out. Only respondents with Android or iOS were selected to the study. Identification and analysis of trip segments is omitted, although they are collected in the traditional method. A case study approach has been conducted for the collection and analysis of data with the purpose of comparing traditional methods with emerging ones. 13 volunteers have been tracked for 10 days by using their smart-phones. Travel data from the applications Google NOW and SMiO were selected as alternative data sources. 121 telephone interviews were done based on the traditional travel survey. The participants were divided into two groups in order to compare the traditional telephone interview to an assisted telephone interview with additional information from Google. Data were interpreted by using simple descriptive statistics. 43 % of registered trips in SMiO were found in the telephone interviews. The applications identified approximately 1,2 fewer trips than the traditional method and there was little difference between active and passive mode. Except for walking trips the estimate for travel modes between the two applications have a low correlation. The applications also have a higher proportion of unknown transport modes than the traditional method. The results show that the applications perform differently on different operating systems. iOS does not seem to be suitable for use in travel surveys, due to reduced logging frequency. Because of this, there is also a major underestimation of the start time for trips taken with iOS. Generally the participants preferred passive tracking of trips, due to less burdensome investigation. It appears that within all four methods there are elements, that when isolated, have qualities who should be considered in future work. If developing a new method for travel survey registrations, it is recommended that a passive approach based on data from SMiO are used.