The paper assesses the quality of public transport services and the influence of individual components on the value of the overall satisfaction level with transport services. Public transport has many benefits in terms of energy savings, environmental impact, social equity and urban economy. The analysis of existing research confirms that the quality of service provided by the public transport system affects the intentions of potential passengers to use it more. However, the level of economic well-being, the state of development of the transport system, and the national strategy for developing social mobility influence the different perceptions of the importance of similar parameters of public transport functioning. The research was conducted based on the results of surveys of the population of Lviv. It was found that the perception of value indicators (fare and methods of paying for travel) differs the most depending on age, average monthly income and type of employment. The socio-economic indicators of the respondents have the least influence on the change in the estimation of time indicators of displacement. In this case, the level of satisfaction correlates with the actual durations of individual components of the movement (the time of the trip and the waiting time at the stop). According to the results of the surveys, the time parameters of the movement, the occupancy of the vehicle, the cleanliness of the vehicle, and the behavior of the driver have more influence on the overall assessment of the transport service quality indicator than the equipment of the stop, the convenience of boarding/alighting, the noise in the vehicle, and the convenience of paying for the fare. The obtained results can be useful for providers and customers of transport services when determining priority measures to improve the quality of public transport.
1. Ojo, T. K. (2019). Quality of public transport service: An integrative review and research agenda. Transportation Letters, 11(2), 104-116. doi: 10.1080/19427867.2017.1283835 (in English).
https://doi.org/10.1080/19427867.2017.1283835
2. Cruz, I. S., & Katz-Gerro, T. (2016). Urban public transport companies and strategies to promote sustainable consumption practices. Journal of Cleaner Production, 123, 28-33. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.12.007 (in English).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.12.007
3. Van Lierop, D., Badami, M. G., & El-Geneidy, A. M. (2018). What influences satisfaction and loyalty in public transport? A review of the literature. Transport Reviews, 38(1), 52-72. doi: 10.1080/01441647.2017.1298683 (in English).
https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2017.1298683
4. Mugion, R. G., Toni, M., Raharjo, H., Di Pietro, L., & Sebathu, S. P. (2018). Does the service quality of urban public transport enhance sustainable mobility?. Journal of cleaner production, 174, 1566-1587. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.052 (in English).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.052
5. Dell ́Olio, L., Ibeas, A., de Ona, J., & de Ona, R. (2017). Public transportation quality of service: Factors, models, and applications. 232 p. Elsevier. (in English).
6. Göransson, J., & Andersson, H. (2023). Factors that make public transport systems attractive: a review of travel preferences and travel mode choices. European Transport Research Review, 15(1), 32. doi: 10.1186/s12544-023-00609-x (in English).
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-023-00609-x
7. Hansson, J., Pettersson, F., Svensson, H., & Wretstrand, A. (2019). Preferences in regional public transport: a literature review. European Transport Research Review, 11(1), 1-16. doi: 10.1186/s12544-019-0374-4 (in English).
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-019-0374-4
8. Bubalo, T., & Rajsman, M. (2020). Quality of Transport Service in Intercity Road Passenger Transport: A Literature Review. Journal of Traffic and Logistics Engineering Vol, 8(1). doi: 10.18178/jtle.8.1.18-28 (in English).
https://doi.org/10.18178/jtle.8.1.18-28
9. McCarthy, L., Delbosc, A., Currie, G., & Molloy, A. (2017). Factors influencing travel mode choice among families with young children (aged 0-4): a review of the literature. Transport reviews, 37(6), 767-781. doi: 10.1080/01441647.2017.1354942 (in English).
https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2017.1354942
10. Jamal, S., & Newbold, K. B. (2020). Factors associated with travel behavior of millennials and older adults: A scoping review. Sustainability, 12(19), 8236. doi: 10.3390/su12198236 (in English).
https://doi.org/10.3390/su12198236
11. Bláfoss Ingvardson, J., Kaplan, S., de Abreu e Silva, J., Di Ciommo, F., Shiftan, Y., & Nielsen, O. A. (2020). Existence, relatedness and growth needs as mediators between mode choice and travel satisfaction: evidence from Denmark. Transportation, 47, 337-358. doi: 10.1007/s11116-018-9886-3 (in English).
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-018-9886-3
12. Dubernet, I., & Axhausen, K. W. (2020). The German value of time and value of reliability study: the survey work. Transportation, 47(3), 1477-1513. doi: 10.1007/s11116-019-10052-4 (in English).
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-019-10052-4
13. Garrido, C., De Oña, R., & De Oña, J. (2014). Neural networks for analyzing service quality in public transportation. Expert Systems with Applications, 41(15), 6830-6838. doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2014.04.045 (in English).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2014.04.045
14. Guirao, B., García-Pastor, A., & López-Lambas, M. E. (2016). The importance of service quality attributes in public transportation: Narrowing the gap between scientific research and practitioners' needs. Transport Policy, 49, 68-77. doi: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2016.04.003 (in English).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2016.04.003
15. Börjesson, M., & Rubensson, I. (2019). Satisfaction with crowding and other attributes in public transport. Transport policy, 79, 213-222. doi: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2019.05.010 (in English).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2019.05.010
16. Tanko, M., Cheemakurthy, H., Kihl, S. H., & Garme, K. (2019). Water transit passenger perceptions and planning factors: A Swedish perspective. Travel Behaviour and Society, 16, 23-30. doi: 10.1016/j.tbs.2019.02.002 (in English).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2019.02.002
17. Dos Santos, J. B., & Lima, J. P. (2021). Quality of public transportation based on the multi-criteria approach and from the perspective of user's satisfaction level: A case study in a Brazilian city. Case Studies on Transport Policy, 9(3), 1233-1244. doi: 10.1016/j.cstp.2021.05.015 (in English).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2021.05.015
18. Birago, D., Mensah, S. O., & Sharma, S. (2017). Level of service delivery of public transport and mode choice in Accra, Ghana. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 46, 284-300. doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2016.09.033 (in English).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2016.09.033
19. Moslem, S., Alkharabsheh, A., Ismael, K., & Duleba, S. (2020). An integrated decision support model for evaluating public transport quality. Applied Sciences, 10(12), 4158. doi: 10.3390/app10124158 (in English).
https://doi.org/10.3390/app10124158
20. Wang, Y., Cao, M., Liu, Y., Ye, R., Gao, X., & Ma, L. (2022). Public transport equity in Shenyang: Using structural equation modelling. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 42, 100555. doi: 10.1016/j.rtbm.2020.100555 (in English).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rtbm.2020.100555