Article citation information:
Dashdamirov, F.,
Javadli, U., Verdiyev, T. Comparative
analysis of the weight and quality of urban bus transport services: a case
study of Baku. Scientific Journal of
Silesian University of Technology. Series Transport. 2022, 116, 99-111. ISSN: 0209-3324. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20858/sjsutst.2022.116.6.
Fuad DASHDAMIROV[1], Ulvi JAVADLI[2], Turan VERDİYEV[3]
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE WEIGHT AND QUALITY OF URBAN BUS TRANSPORT
SERVICES: A CASE STUDY OF BAKU
Summary. With the
growth of the population and the expansion of the territory of large cities,
certain difficulties arise in meeting the needs of passengers for
transportation. This article studied the satisfaction of users with the city's
public transport system, especially the bus transport. Thus, a survey was
conducted among passengers in Baku to assess their satisfaction with public
transport. The survey covered all districts of Baku in general. The study was
conducted in October 2021. The questions were aimed at identifying the weight,
reasons for preferring the different types of public transport, the level
of satisfaction of the population with these types, assessing the quality of
services and the lack of urban bus transport. The level of satisfaction of
survey participants with the work of public transport by gender and age groups
was determined. Subsequently, this study showed that most of the population
movements are carried out by bus transport. The analysis revealed factors that
reduce the quality of service on bus routes. In addition, it examined the
reasons why the population chose the bus transport, the shortcomings of
the bus transport, the effectiveness of dedicated bus lanes, and attitudes
toward the use of alternative public transport. Summarily, this study was
successful in identifying the shortcomings of public transport in the city,
improving passenger service to increase passenger satisfaction toward
attracting more people to public transport.
Keywords: public
transport, bus, service quality, alternative transport
1. INTRODUCTION
The
rapid growth in the number of vehicles in cities creates problems associated
with congestion. Traffic jams begin to appear, especially during peak hours.
The number of cars in the Azerbaijan Republic has increased by 143,000 vehicles
from 2016-2020 [1]. The main reason people prefer private cars is their
convenience and accessibility in comparison with public transport [2]. In most
cities, alternative and high-quality public transport are used to reduce
traffic congestion and the use of private cars [3, 4]. One of the alternative
solutions to reduce traffic congestion is to optimize and encourage the use of
public transport [5-7].
With
the growth of the size and population of the city, there is a need for various
types of public transport. Traditional modes of public transport (bus,
trolleybus, metro, tram, taxi) used in cities have been recently supplemented
with either modified versions of these modes of transport (Metrobus, metro
tram, LRT, etc.) or modern modes of transport, such as PRTand maglev. Of
course, for each city, these modes of transport can be used considering the
historical planning structure, relief, and transport infrastructure [8-10].
The
most densely populated territory of the Azerbaijan Republic is the capital city
of Baku. The city's population was 2,064,600 in 2010 and 2,300,500 in 2021.
Currently, taxis, subways, buses and commuter trains serve passengers in the
city. The metro line network includes 26 stations and does not cover all areas
of the city. The first metro lines in Baku were put into operation in 1967.
Until the end of the 20th century, along with the metro, bus, tram and
trolleybus transport operated in Baku. For various objective and subjective
reasons, trams were dismantled in Baku, and the operation of trolleybuses was
suspended.
In
the subsequent period, against the backdrop of the growth of Baku, only the bus
network was developed to meet mobility needs,
and thus, although the population of Baku exceeds 2 million people, the bus
transport still dominates. Currently, Baku has a network of bus routes covering
173 routes. An analysis of the intensity on these routes shows that many bus
routes are accompanied by problems at stops [11]. The movement of buses in the
general flow of traffic creates serious deviations from the traffic schedule
due to traffic jams during peak hours.
In
Baku, buses are both the main mode of transport and the auxiliary transport,
carrying passengers to the metro. In such a situation, determining the quality
of passenger service and passenger satisfaction can be important in making
decisions aimed at better meeting the needs of passengers in movement.
Determining passenger satisfaction with public transport is useful for
enhancing the attractiveness of public transport.
The
low quality of public transport services leads to an increase in the number of
owners of personal vehicles among the population, which translates to traffic
jams and accidents and environmental pollution [12, 13]. Therefore, it is
important and necessary to take measures to improve the quality and efficiency
of the services and encourage the use of public transport. Based on this, we
can say that the study of passenger satisfaction with public transport services
is a very topical issue.
2. LITERATURE
REVIEW
Different
methods are used in different works to assess the quality of public transport
services and identify the factors that mostly affect the quality of service.
In
the work of Zhang et al., passenger satisfaction with public transport was
assessed using a combination of the entropy weight method (EWM), analytic
hierarchy process (AHP) and the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation (FCE) method.
Passenger comfort, transfer convenience, waiting time, information, station
environment, interior sanitation, information, and service were chosen as the
main criteria. The level of passenger satisfaction from the services of
traditional bus routes and railway transport was determined [14].
The
method proposed by Paulo Siga Thomas et al. for assessing the level of
satisfaction of the population with public transport services on routes passing
through university campuses is based on fuzzy logic. To assess
passengers’ satisfaction, questionnaires were developed to determine the
impact of comfort, parking/terminal, vehicle performance, and driver skill [15].
The study found that satisfaction levels can be increased through comfort and
mutual relationship with passengers. Particularly, these factors directly
affect the comfort of riding on the
vehicle.
According
to the results of a survey conducted in Lisbon to determine the user experience
of traveling by public transport and their satisfaction with the transport
system, passenger satisfaction indices were determined using fuzzy clustering
and a regression tree [16]. The average level of satisfaction on a ten-point
scale of satisfaction was 6.12.
Weng
et al. divided scores into 6 systems (timeliness, safety, convenience, comfort,
reliability, and economy) when surveying to examine attitudes toward bus use in
Beijing [17].
In
the work of Karzan and Szabolcs, three hypotheses about the quality of service
that affect the level of passenger satisfaction were considered, and it was
concluded that the factors mostly influencing satisfaction are safety,
accessibility and quality of service [18]. Two PLS models (evaluative and
structural) and their principles are given. Service quality indicators were
evaluated based on the obtained statistical indicators.
In
a study conducted in the city of Johor Bahru (Malaysia), based on a survey of
225 respondents, attributes such as reliability, bus travel, bus performance,
simplicity and accessibility, driver-passenger relationship, information and
usability were grouped and analyzed. The importance of these parameters for
passengers is determined [19].
In
Kota Kinabalu (Malaysia), a survey was conducted in selected areas of the city,
especially at bus stops, buses, shopping malls, and public and private
institutions, to determine passengers’ satisfaction with the quality of
service of the bus route. For the analysis of 24 parameters identified during
the study that affect the quality of service, descriptive statistics were used,
covering mean and standard deviations, as well as factor analysis [20].
The
work of Jan Chocholac et al. revealed that the results of surveys among
different groups of respondents differ in their perception of various factors
of service quality. Accessibility, information, availability, customer care,
and comfort were taken as factors of service quality. Studies have shown that
different age groups perceive comfort and service differently [21].
In
addition, many other authors have used factor analysis based on individual
indicators to assess the level of passengers’ satisfaction with public
transport [22-24]. Reliability, responsibility, safety, physical capabilities,
environment, distance to stop, and travel time were taken as the main factors
in these works.
One
of the indicators of passengers’ service on bus routes is the travel
time; this indicator is influenced by various parameters. It should be noted
that the level of influence of these parameters on the travel time varies [25].
Risdiyanto
et al. used the analytical hierarchical process (AHP) method to assess
passengers’ satisfaction with public transport [26]. The main criteria
were waiting time, travel time, transport costs, comfort and safety.
3. METHODOLOGY
A survey was conducted in Baku to determine the
level of public satisfaction with public transport services. The survey covered
all districts of Baku (13 districts). Using tablets and mobile phones,
questionnaires were used to conduct the survey. Students and graduates of the
Azerbaijan Technical University took part in the survey. In the survey
conducted among 506 respondents, 40 questions were included in the
questionnaires.
The purpose of using the survey method is to
identify the main dissatisfaction of passengers regarding the transportation
service.
The questions were divided into 3 parts related to
passenger comfort level, time loss and safety. The main difficulties passengers
face when using public transport were identified, the main features that they
prefer in public transport and measures to solve problems are proposed.
4. ANALYSIS OF THE USE OF PUBLIC
TRANSPORT
The respondents were divided into 5 age groups
(18-25, 26-35, 36-45, 46-55, 56-65 years). Largely, 68% of the respondents were
men (343 questionnaires), while 32% were women (163 questionnaires). Further,
30% of the respondents were aged 26-35. The gender distribution by age of
survey participants in Baku is shown in Figure 1.
The population of Baku city mainly uses four modes of
transport. Only the metro serves passengers within the city. Other modes of
transport also cover suburban areas. Sometimes, residents of the city use
several modes of transport for mobility. The proportion of the population using
public transport modes is shown in Figure 2.
Fig. 1. Age and gender distribution of survey participants
Tab. 1.
Distribution of age groups of respondents by gender
and education
|
No |
Distribution of respondents
by age |
Gender |
Education |
Total,
% |
|||
|
Men,
% |
Women, % |
Secondary, % |
Vocational, % |
High,
% |
|||
|
1. |
18-25 |
15,6 |
6,4 |
5,6 |
0,6 |
15,8 |
22 |
|
2. |
26-35 |
21,85 |
8,15 |
10,5 |
1,78 |
17,72 |
30 |
|
3. |
36-45 |
16,5 |
6,5 |
9,8 |
2,16 |
11,04 |
23 |
|
4. |
46-55 |
6,25 |
4,75 |
4,5 |
1,9 |
4,6 |
11 |
|
5. |
56-65 |
7,6 |
6,4 |
5 |
1,8 |
7,2 |
14 |
|
|
Total,
% |
67, 8 |
32,2 |
35,4 |
8,24 |
56,36 |
100 |
Fig. 2. Proportion of the population using public
transport
As seen in Figure 2, 72% of the passengers use
regular bus routes, 46% use the metro, 42% use taxis and only 2% use trains.
Broken down by age group, passengers aged 56-65 (84%) tend to use regular bus
routes.
Trains serve passengers in suburban areas. Within
the city limits, among the three modes of transport, 58% of the population
prefer to travel by bus, 24% by taxi and 28% by metro. However, passengers
prefer a particular mode of transport for various reasons. Table 2 shows that
the main reason for the population choosing regular bus routes to travel in
Baku was the closeness of bus stops to their place of residence (31%) and place
of work (17%). Further, 15% of those surveyed use regular bus routes for
convenience. However, 36% of the population prefer the metro because of the
travel speed and 21% because of the ease of travel. The number of men who
prefer the metro because of its high speed (42%) exceeds the number of women
(33%). On the contrary, women (23%) prefer the metro more than men (19%)
because of the ease of travel. Additionally, 37% of the passengers surveyed
prefer taxis for convenience. While 17% of the population choose taxis because
of their high travel speed.
Tab. 2.
Reason for preferring a particular mode of transport
|
Reason for use |
Bus |
Underground |
Taxi |
|
Profitability |
18% |
13% |
10% |
|
High travel
speed |
6% |
36% |
17% |
|
Price |
10% |
5% |
4% |
|
Convenience |
15% |
21% |
37% |
|
Closeness
to place of work |
17% |
6% |
4% |
|
Security |
1% |
0% |
1% |
|
Need
due to the COVID 19 pandemic |
1% |
0% |
10% |
|
Closeness
to places of residence |
31% |
14% |
2% |
|
Time saving |
1% |
5% |
6% |
|
Density
in other modes of transport |
0% |
0% |
9% |
Most
of the respondents (37%) declared the bus transport as a dangerous mode of
transport (Figure 3). The number of men who considered traveling by bus as
dangerous is greater than the number of women with the same approach. On the
other hand, 33% of respondents considered traveling by taxi as dangerous, 14%
by metro, and 3% by train. However, only 13% of passengers
consider all modes of transport safe.
Fig. 3. Distribution of the ratio of passengers
to the danger of the mode of transport
Most
of the passengers (47%) are generally dissatisfied with bus transport (Figure
4). Only 8% of passengers using the metro are dissatisfied with the operation
of this mode of transport. However, 37% of passengers have no complaints about
the different modes of transport. Alternatively, 59% of passengers aged 26-35
are dissatisfied with the work of bus transport. While 51% of passengers aged
56-65 did not show dissatisfaction with the work of the urban transport.
Fig. 4. Distribution of level of dissatisfaction with the work of public
transport
5. ANALYSIS OF THE QUALITY OF URBAN BUS TRANSPORT SERVICES
To
identify the most important reasons for the dissatisfaction of passengers with
the work of bus transport, a separate question was included in the questionnaire.
It turned out that 37% of passengers are dissatisfied with the work of buses on
the route because of the density, 21% because the buses are late for a stop,
and the interval is too long (Figure 5). Furthermore, 16% of dissatisfied
respondents are dissatisfied because of the use of old and unsuitable buses on
the routes. Dissatisfaction with the behavior of bus drivers is 12%.
Fig. 5. Reasons for dissatisfaction of passengers with the work of buses on
the route
The
majority of respondents (67%) who use bus services consider safety to be the
main indicator of the quality of bus services (Figure 6). Men prefer safety
more than women. Further, 55% of respondents consider travel times as an
indicator of quality. The most preferred indicators of the quality of bus
transportation were the professionalism of the driver (42%), the comfort
of the trip (38%), the cleanliness of the cabin (37%), compliance with the
sanitary rules of the internal regulations (30%), and the availability of
places for the disabled (23%).
Fig. 6. Preferred
indicators of the quality
of bus transportation
According
to 76% of the passengers surveyed, the most tangible shortcoming in the transportation
of passengers on bus routes in Baku is the use of old buses (Figure 7).
Further, 37% of respondents complained about the behavior
of drivers, 32% about the low capacity of the bus, and 30% about the
uncomfortable seats. The lack of information about the route at stops, the
discrepancy between traffic intervals and traffic flows, insufficient heating
and cooling of the passenger compartment, bus delays at intermediate
stops, and the location of stops are also noted as attribution factors to the
lack of bus passenger traffic.
Fig. 7. The main shortcomings in the operation of the bus routes
As
seen in Figure 8, How does the use of specialized
lanes affect the operation of bus routes? received
contrasting responses. In response, 37% of the respondents answered that by
using specialized lanes they get to their destination faster, and 33% think
that the creation of specialized bus lanes in Baku did not affect the operation
of routes. On the other hand, 6% of respondents stated that the use of
specialized lanes does not affect the operation of buses during peak hours.
While 19% of the respondents believe that dedicated bus lanes were only
effective for passengers who move along this part of the streets.
Fig.
8. The impact of the use of specialized lanes on the operation of bus routes
In
different cities, depending on the characteristics of the city's public transport
network, the walking distance of passengers to the bus stop may vary. In
Sydney, for example, 1,906 out of 1,952 passengers walk from their homes to a
public transit stop less than 2,000 meters long. Most of these trips were made
at a distance of less than 1,200 meters [27].
According
to the results of surveys, for 62% of the population, the distance from the
place of residence to the bus stop is 50–200 m. For 24%, this distance is
200–400 m, and for 8%, 400–500 m. While for 6%, it is 500-750 m
long and more. The vast majority of the population walks less than 500 meters
(approximately 6 minutes on foot) to reach their bus stop. However, this can
lead to the formation of complex networks with low frequencies [28].
Due
to bus overcrowding during peak hours, 40% of passengers sometimes have
difficulty boarding the bus. Then 19% of respondents several times and 11% once
a week cannot get on the bus. While 14% of respondents have difficulty getting
on the bus every day. Only 16% of those surveyed have no difficulty getting on
the bus during rush hours.
With
the expansion of the city boundaries, the need of the population changed its
volume and character. Special measures are required, including the use of
alternative modes of public transport. To identify the opinion of the urban
population regarding the use of an alternative type of public passenger
transport, the questionnaires included questions related to the advisability
of using alternative types of public transport in Baku.
As
seen in Figure 9, 74% of the respondents consider it expedient to use the tram
in Baku. According to the survey, 27% of the city's population consider it
expedient to use the metro bus (high-speed bus transport), and 22% -
trolleybuses. The greatest positive response to the use of the metro bus is
observed among respondents aged 36-45 years. While 11% of respondents do not
consider it expedient to use any of the above types of public transport.
Majorly,
51% of respondents consider it more expedient to use this type of transport in
the central part of the city, and 37% in all districts of the city (Figure
10). Then 15% of respondents consider it expedient to use the tram in suburban
areas, and 3% - in micro districts. However, 2% of respondents consider the
area of application as insignificant.
Since
bus transport is the main mass street mode of transport, the density of the bus
route network is very high. Despite this and the use of specialized bus lines
in the provision of services, there are still problems associated with the loss
of passengers’ time. A good alternative would be to create a network of
light rail transport.
Fig. 9.
Distribution of the ratio of the expediency of
using an alternative type of public transport in Baku
Fig. 10.
Distribution of the attitude of respondents to the places where tram lines are
used
CONCLUSION
The quality of public transport services should be
assessed regularly. The goal is to identify the wishes of passengers and
possible ways to increase mobility in cities. Among the many indicators that
determine the quality of urban public transport, passengers are more interested
in safety, delivery time, professionalism of drivers, ease of travel and
internal cleanliness.
An analysis of passenger service by public transport
in the city of Baku shows that the most popular mode of transport for the
population is the bus transport. However, the vast majority of passengers are
dissatisfied with the work of the bus transport. At the same time, passengers
consider the bus transport to be the most dangerous type of public transport.
The reason for using buses is the closeness of bus stops, that is, the
availability of this transport. The main dissatisfaction of passengers is the
use of old buses, congestion and delays of vehicles plying on bus routes.
The vast majority of the population can reach their
bus stop in a short time. Although advantageous in terms of bus stop
availability, this could, however, result in a high density of bus routes.
Although the intervals on the bus routes are not long, passengers are often
unable to board the bus due to overcrowding. The high level of use of taxi
services in the city indicates a low level of ease of use of public transport.
Most respondents consider it necessary to create a
network of alternative modes of public transport. Furthermore, they also
advised the increased use of trams or other types of public transport in the
city
References
1.
The State Statistical Committee of the Azerbaijan
Republic. Statistical data from the State Statistical
Committee. Available at: https://www.stat.gov.az.
2.
Berman N.D., Belov А.М. 2019.
“Public transport and innovations”. International Journal of Advanced Studies 9(2): 7-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12731/2227-930X-2019-1-7-13.
3.
Kai Lu, Han Baoming, Zhou Xuesong. 2018.
“Smart Urban Transit Systems: From Integrated Framework to
Interdisciplinary Perspective”. Urban
Rail Transit 4(2): 49-67. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40864-018-0080-x.
4.
Wong S.C., Wıllıam H.K. Lam. 2006.
“Planning and policy of public transportation systems in Asia”. Transportation 33: 111-113. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-005-3045-3.
5.
Susilawati M., D.P.E. Nilakusmawati. 2017.
“Study on the factors affecting the quality of public bus transportation
service in Bali Province using factor analysis”. International Conference on Mathematics: Education, Theory and
Application. IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 855:
012051. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/855/1/012051.
6.
Pradeep Chaitanya Jasti, V. Vinayaka Ram. 2018. “Integrated Performance
Assessment and Service Level Benchmarking of Urban Bus System using Fuzzy Logic”.
European Transport / Trasporti
Europei 69: 1-14.
7.
Verma A., S.L. Dhingra. 2001. “Suitability of alternative systems
for urban mass transport for Indian cities”. European Transport / Trasporti Europei 18: 4-15.
8.
Fleurent C., S. Voß. 2011. “Public transport: case studies and
applications”. Public Transport
3: 105-107.
9.
Niewczas A., G. Koszalka, J. Wrona, D. Pieniak. 2008. “Chosen aspects of municipal transport
operation on the example of the city of Lublin”. Transport 23(1): 88-90. DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3846/1648-4142.2008.23.88-90.
10.
Schmidt Marie, Stefan Voss.
2017. „Advanced
systems in public transport”. Public
Transport 9(1-2) Special Issue: 3-6.
11.
Dashdamirov Fuad. 2013. “Coordination
of the work of buses in city routes”. Transport Problems
8(4): 78-82. ISSN: 1896-0596.
12.
Rahman F., T.D. Chowdhury,
Major M.T. Haque, M.R. Rahman, M.A.
Islam. 2015. “Analyzing Customer
Satisfaction of Bus Service in Dhaka City”. International Conference on Recent Innovation in Civil Engineering for Sustainable
Development (IICSD-2015). Department
of Civil Engineering. 2015, Gazipur,
Bangladesh. Paper ID: EE-047.
13.
Kolawole Ojo Thomas. 2017. “Quality of public
transport service: an integrative review and research agenda”. The International Journal of Transportation
Research. Transportation Letters. ISSN: 1942-7867 (Print). ISSN: 1942-7875
(Online). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/19427867.2017.1283835.
14.
Xinhuan Zhang, Liu Hongjie, Xu Mingming, Mao
Chengyuan, Shi Junqing, Meng Guolian, Wu Jinhong. 2020. “Evaluation
of passenger satisfaction of urban multi-mode public transport”. PLoS ONE 15(10). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0241004.
15.
Paulo Siga Thomaz, Carolina Martins Nogueira,
Leonardo Costa Coelho, Ana Maria Volkmer de Azambuja, Viviane Leite
Dias de Mattos. 2016. “Satisfaction with public transport: the case of an
university access”. Journal of
Engineering Research and Applications 6(2): 01-06. ISSN: 2248-9622.
16.
Vicente Paula, Abdul Suleman,
Elizabeth Reis. 2020. “Index of Satisfaction with Public Transport: A Fuzzy
Clustering Approach”. Sustainability 12(22). DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su12229759.
17.
Jiancheng Weng, Xiaojian
Di, Chang Wang, Jingjing Wang, Lizeng Mao. 2018. “A Bus Service Evaluation
Method from Passenger’s Perspective
Based on Satisfaction Surveys: A Case Study of Beijing,
China”. Sustainability
10(8). DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su10082723.
18.
Karzan Ismael, Szabolcs
Duleb. 2021. “Investigation
of the Relationship between
the Perceived Public Transport Service Quality and Satisfaction: A PLS-SEM Technique”. Sustainability 13(23). DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su132313018.
19.
Anil Minhans, Shamsuddin Shahid, Sitti Asmah Hassa.
2015. “Assessment
of Bus Service-Quality using
Passengers’ Perceptions”.
Jurnal Teknologi (Sciences & Engineering): 61-67. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11113/jt.v73.4290. ISSN: 2180-3722.
20.
Harifah Mohd Noor, Na’asah Nasrudin, Jurry
Foo. 2014. “Determinants of Customer Satisfaction of Service Quality:
City bus service in Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia”. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 153: 595-605. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.10.092.
21.
Chocholac Jan, Dana Sommerauerova,
Jaroslava Hyrslova, Tomas
Kucera, Roman Hruska, Stanislav
Machalik. 2020. “Service quality
of the urban public transport companies
and sustainable city logistics”. Open
Engineering 10: 86-97. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/eng-2020-0010.
22.
Singh Sanjay. 2016.
“Assessment of passenger
satisfaction with public bus
transport services: A case study
of Lucknow city (India)”. Studies in Business
and Economics. 11(3): 107-128. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/sbe-2016-0039.
23.
Syazwan Baharum, Suria
Haron, Iqhlima Ismail, Jezan Md. Diah. 2019.
“Urban Bus Service Quality through
Sustainable Assessment
Model”. International Journal of Supply Chain Management 8(3): 576-585. ISSN:
2050-7399.
24.
Munzilah Md. Rohani, Devapriya Chitral
Wijeyesekera, Ahmad Tarmizi Abd. Karim. 2012.
“Bus Operation, Quality
Service, and the Role of Bus Provider and Driver”. Conference on Engineering & Technology: 167-178. Malaysian Technical University. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2013.02.022.
25.
Victor Jian Ming Low, Hooi
Ling, Khoo Wooi Chen Khoo. 2021. “Quantifying bus
travel time variability and identifying spatial and temporal factors using Burr
distribution model”. International
Journal of Transportation
Science and Technology. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijtst.2021.07.004.
26.
Risdiyanto, Nindyo Cahyo Kresnanto, Zenildo X.C.
2019. “Faktor penentu dalam pemılıhan moda angkutan umum
perkotaan menggunakan metode analytıc hıerarchy process (AHP)”.
Prosiding Simposium Forum Studi
Transportasi antar Perguruan Tinggi ke-22. Universitas Halu Oleo, Kendari,
01-03 November 2019.
27.
Balcombe R., Roger L. Mackett, N. Paulley, et all.
2004. “The demand for public
transport: a practical guide”. TRL Report TRL593. ISSN: 0968-4107.
28.
Rhonda Daniels, Corinne Mulley. 2011. “Explaining walking distance to public
transport: the dominance of public transport supply”. World Symposium on Transport and Land Use
Research. Whistler Canada. 28-30 July 2011. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.v6i2.308.
Received 12.03.2022; accepted in
revised form 07.05.2022
Scientific Journal of Silesian University of Technology. Series
Transport is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License
[1] Institute
of Logistics and Transport, Azerbaijan Technical
University, Baku, H. Javid 25, Azerbaijan. Email: fuad.dasdamirov@aztu.edu.az. ORCID:
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3781-3542
[2] Institute
of Logistics and Transport, Azerbaijan Technical
University, Baku, H. Javid 25, Azerbaijan. Email: ulvi.cavadlı@aztu.edu.az. ORCID:
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4993-9233
[3] Institute
of Logistics and Transport, Azerbaijan Technical
University, Baku, H. Javid 25, Azerbaijan. Email: turan.verdiyev@aztu.edu.az. ORCID:
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9520-5038