The Transit Riding Habit Can Last a Lifetime, But First You Need to Get People in the Habit

The habit-forming power of transit is real, but on its own it won't lead to a transit revival in the U.S. Photo: Ben Schumin/Wikimedia Commons
The habit-forming power of transit is real, but on its own it won't lead to a transit revival in the U.S. Photo: Ben Schumin/Wikimedia Commons

The last few months have delivered bad news about U.S. transit: Ridership is declining in most cities; New York faces its first non-recession decline since the early 1990s; and there’s an outright crisis in Washington. A new study suggests there is a bright spot in the long run — but only if American cities invest in transit now.

The study by Rutgers’ Michael Smart and Columbia’s Nicholas Klein, “Remembrance of Cars and Buses Past,” concerns habit formation. It implies that Millennials’ habits of using transit, developed over the past decade or so, can persist throughout life — but that on its own, this effect won’t generate a significant transit revival without improving service and building transit-oriented development.

Habit formation has been studied before. See, for example, this paper by researchers at the University of Cardiff that found people who have just moved are more likely to use transit and less likely to drive than people who have lived in the same area for a long time. This remains true after controlling for income and other demographic variables. After moving to a place, people begin to develop a habit for driving, or for taking transit, and this persists later in life — but not if they move again.

Smart and Klein look at a two-by-two matrix: Americans who live in high-transit census tracts versus low-transit tracts, and Americans who moved between a high-transit tract and a low-transit tract. People who moved from a high-transit area to a low-transit one ride transit at a higher rate and own fewer cars than people who have always lived in a low-transit tract. In the other direction, there is no persistence of car use: on the contrary, people who move from a low-transit tract to a high-transit tract have about the same transit usage as people who have always lived in a high-transit tract.

They then model the effects of past habits on transit use, and find that they are quite strong. People who get used to taking transit rather than driving are likely to keep doing so for decades. The formative age is the late 20s and early 30s: too old to be a young adult, but often too young to be entrenched in a place. In the middle class, this is roughly the age at which people begin to settle down and have children. For people age 40 to 60, the built environment they lived in when they were about 30 has twice the impact on their mode choice as the built environment they currently live in.

On the surface, it looks like a cause for optimism. Older Millennials, who got used to driving less than older cohorts in the late 2000s and early 2010s, will carry those habits with them as they get older. Moreover, habit formation shows evidence of being one-sided: People with experience with transit keep riding transit to some extent, people with experience with driving abandon the car when they move to a transit-rich neighborhood.

This may be related to research on the effect of fuel prices on transit use. Surging fuel prices last decade led to growth in transit ridership, but falling prices in the last few years did not lead to as big a decline. Experience with transit-rich neighborhoods creates a later habit of using transit more and driving less, as seems to be the case with the experience with having to use transit because fuel is too expensive.

While the habit formation effect is real, it is not, unfortunately, very large. Smart and Klein conclude:

Our work suggests that experiencing high-quality transit earlier in life can lead to a decrease of a couple of percentage points in car ownership rates and a meaningful increase in the likelihood (moving, roughly, from “very unlikely” to simply “unlikely” in the U.S. context) of using transit once or more a month.

Moving adults from being “very unlikely” to “unlikely” to use transit is a very low bar. So what is the relevance of this habit formation research for future planning?

One implication is that transit service should be easy to understand for recent movers. Rail services are usually pretty clear to new arrivals, but buses are harder. Here, the reforms that raise bus ridership via network redesign can also make service clearer for occasional users and newcomers. Bus grids are more legible than systems with extensive branching and recombination of routes. Routes that run consistent service all day are more legible than routes with special rush hour-only patterns. Some American cities are moving in this direction, but most still aren’t.

But when it comes to the built environment, there is no special solution. If cities want transit use to move from the “very unlikely” category to “likely” and not just to “unlikely,” they need to reorient the physical landscape through zoning for more compact development, lower parking requirements, road diets, dedicated bus lanes, bike lanes, and wide sidewalks. These ingredients all contribute to creating habits for walking, biking, and riding transit, but they also promote these modes without any relation to habit.

In areas where the quality of transit service is very poor, there is no substitute for the addition and expansion of service. In cities with only skeletal bus service and no rail (for example, Tampa, where systemwide bus ridership is 47,000 trips per day), creating a transit habit means adding more service, rather than reorganizing existing service. When buses are too slow to be useful, potentially controversial street interventions like bus lanes and signal priority for buses are necessary.

Smart and Klein’s study gives some reason to be optimistic about future transit use by Millennials. But absent immediate investments, there is not going to be a transit revival in the United States. People will still suburbanize and get one car per adult if they can afford it, and the transit habit effect will remain small.

  • Vooch

    I’ll argue the best way to have a transit revival is to privatize all interstates.

    Joe six pack paying 15 cents a mile for his 40 mile daily commute will change his mobility pattern PDQ.

    until subsidies for private car driving are eliminated, mass motoring will continue

  • Dom Maysun

    Let’s get some more green power motor company busses out their they don’t use fossil fuel and a lot of people would use them because they don’t they have a double decker that I would to ride but probably won’t in my lifetime

  • Alon Levy

    Yes, but. Have you seen European fuel taxes? And yet, transit mode shares in Europe outside the major cities aren’t great. The big differences between Europe and the US are,

    – The big European cities have very high transit usage – better than New York, leagues better than Boston/Chicago/Washington/San Francisco. Paris and London both have higher rail ridership than New York in absolute numbers, despite being smaller. Paris’s modal split is around 42% car, 42% transit, 16% other (walk, cycle, etc.); New York’s is around 55% car, 30% transit, 15% other.

    – Even down to a metro population of about 2 million, some (not all) cities have very good transit usage (Stockholm, Vienna, Prague). Down to 1 million, a few are still good (Geneva, Strasbourg, Karlsruhe, Bratislava) and some more are decent (Bordeaux, Gothenburg), but most are already pretty auto-oriented.

    – While a large majority of people drive to work, vkm per capita is closer to 8,000 than to the American 16,000. Smaller cities are less sprawly (though France and Germany have hypermarkets no different from Wal-Mart) and people live closer to work and chain trips better. They also drive smaller, more fuel-efficient cars.

  • Vooch

    Alon,

    agreed mode share is unlikely going to go below 10% for private cars in NYC and 30% for LA.

    However, eliminating subsidies will dramatically reduce VMT as you suggested. That’s a yuge achievement in of it self.

    I think it’s realistic to set as a goal the private car situation which existed in 1960 USA.

    VMT less than 5,000 miles.
    25% of household own 2 cars
    50% own 1 car
    25% do not own a car

    Privatization of ( many ) interstates is politically feasible in the US. . In US, the opportunities for graft are great incentives for politicians to implement privatization.

    On the other hand, Gas Tax increase is a third rail.

    I’d much rather discuss how to Electrify the entire Surfliner and the Bayrische Oberland Bahn. Don’t you have some pull with the french owners of the BOB ?

  • mike

    Looking at on-going decline in weekday ridership in DC, I’m curious to see what the census data for walking mode share will be for the next census. We’ve increased population by 12%+ in the City since the 2010 in mostly transit oriented developments. That being said, ridership has dropped stone, but traffic congestion has been declining since 2008. Biking will be up, but it’s starting from a relatively negligible mode-share (~3%). I would not be surprised if walking share has increased significantly from from 12% in 2010. Taxi/Ridershare will be up, but should be captured in the broader traffic congestion trend.

  • Jason

    Purely anecdotal but I know that personally I moved from Clarendon to DC in 2013 after moving to Clarendon from NY in 2012 specifically to avoid having to use the Metro on the weekend. I still rode the Metro to work but since I was going to Pentagon City and unwittingly moved to Clarendon two weeks before Rush+ started this was still an improvement for my commute.

    Also once I was in DC I usually waited until ~10 AM to go in in part because I found the ride was actually typically more consistent once rush hour was over.

  • Jason

    Maybe Heidelberg (population of about 150k) is an exception or I stayed with a host family with unusual transportation habits but when I stayed with a host family in Heidelberg they had a car, but said they never used it unless they were going somewhere outside of Heidelberg. The transit coverage seemed pretty good; the Haupstrasse/Altstadt was a notable gap where you were set up for a long walk, but I suspect that may have been a conscious decision to try to keep the area as pedestrian-focused as possible.

    P.S. I never quite understood why the transit closes at midnight but I guess they figure you can take taxis? And as you said the cities tend to be less sprawly so while it wasn’t fun to walk home drunk at 3 AM it wasn’t a disaster to get stuck doing that either.

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

A Misguided Fix for Traffic Congestion in Silicon Valley

|
According to a recent study of transit riders in Denver covered by CityLab, people who work within a 15-minute walk of a rail station are more likely to commute by train than people who live close to transit but don’t work by a station. Network blog Peninsula Transportation Alternatives says the study underscores how a proposal aimed at reining in traffic in Palo […]

FRA Chief: America Is Driving Less and Congress Needs to Catch Up

|
Speaking to reporters earlier today, Federal Railroad Administration chief Joe Szabo said that people are driving less and using transit more — and that those changes are permanent. “America’s travel habits are undergoing rapid change,” he said. It’s a fact, he said (“not opinion — statistically proven”), calling on Congress to show that it understands […]

Two Very Different Ways Bike-Share Benefits Transit

|
A new survey [PDF] by researchers at UC Berkeley and published in Access Magazine sheds light on how bike-share systems interact with transit. Researchers Susan Shaheen and Elliot Martin surveyed more than 10,000 bike-share riders in Montreal, Toronto, Minneapolis-Saint Paul, and Washington, DC. Like previous surveys have shown, Shaheen and Martin found that a significant number of bike-share users reduce car use. But their […]

National Geographic Reveals the World’s Transit Superstars

|
Guess where these people are. Photo by danncer via Flickr. National Geographic released the results of their annual Greendex consumer survey yesterday, ranking the environmental friendliness of housing, transportation and eating habits in nations around the world. Sadly, only one nation can boast that a majority of its population rides transit at least once a […]