National Transport Surveys: What Can We Learn from International Comparison?



National Transport Surveys: What Can We Learn from International Comparison?

Authors

P Bonnel, LET, FR; J Armoogum, INRETS, FR

Description

Presentation of the results of a survey on national transport survey (NTS) in 10 countries to prepare the next French NTS. The communication deals with the methodological comparisons and the lessons for the French NTS

Abstract

France is preparing the next transport national survey forecast for 2007. In this perspective, INRETS and LET, in collaboration with FUNDP (Namur, Belgium) are in charge of an analysis both on methodological aspects and survey content. This analysis deals among others on the contribution of new technologies to improve data quality while maintaining data comparability with previous survey (1994 et 1980 for the two last ones).

In this perspective we have conducted a survey of the National transport survey responsible of ten countries. This survey analyses mainly the following dimensions:
Survey objectives and partners involved;
Target population both in terms of individuals and trips;
Sampling technique;
Protocol and survey methodology (survey mode, use of CATI, CAPI? systems?);
Coding and especially geocoding of data (use of new technologies?);
Non-response analysis and weighting procedure.

From the first results, we can observe great methodological differences between countries. First the definition of trips under collection is different even between European countries. Some countries collect only daily mobility while in other long distance trips are also collected with various definition of long distance (more than 100km, more than 50 miles, a night outside home?). In half countries data collection is realised continuously while in other only at periodic interval (7 years in average, 13 years for the next one in France). CATI or CAPI systems are now the rule for the last surveys conducted. Geocoding is performed in some countries while other realise coding only at communal level. GPS use is still not generalise in any country for trip collection even if there is some projects in some countries. Most of the countries develop weighting procedure to correct for non-response but only few develop strategies to survey non respondent.

The communication will present the results of the comparison and the lessons we can get from this analysis for the next French national transport survey.

Publisher

Association for European Transport