The Scottish Government

Listen

Main Findings

• Integrated ticketing schemes need to: be flexible enough to meet the needs and demands of different markets and different types of passenger (commuters, leisure travellers, tourists).
• Integrated ticketing schemes need to be underpinned by integrated transport systems in order to be effective in encouraging public transport patronage and modal shift.
• Other 'best practices' in terms of successful integrated ticketing schemes include: offering a range of ticket durations; effective and active marketing; and strong operator buy-in.
• There is a relative dearth of quantifiable evidence on the impact of existing schemes on patronage and modal shift and it is very difficult to separate the impact of integrated ticketing from the effects of other improvements to public transport.
• However, the Household Survey conducted for the research suggests that there is reasonable demand for integrated ticketing and that future schemes could have a positive impact in terms of encouraging public transport patronage and modal shift.
• There is a general trend towards the adoption of smartcard technology to underpin integrated ticketing schemes in the UK and abroad.
• Smartcards offer potential advantages, including facilitating revenue distribution, enabling collection of more detailed passenger data to assist in transport planning and offering the passenger a broad range of applications, not confined to transport.
• However, there is a need to monitor the impact of smartcards in terms of effects on boarding/disembarking times, handling of data protection issues, passenger acceptance and passenger use of smartcards for transport and other applications.
• Potential barriers to the success of future integrated ticketing schemes include: securing operator buy-in; identifying an acceptable method for allocating revenue; pricing tickets at the right level to secure passenger uptake; and high (initial) administration and marketing costs. OFT regulations are also an important 'perceived' barrier, but in practice the OFT is able to resolve most concerns about scheme legality if it is consulted.
• Ideally, for a ticket to be fully 'integrated' it should be multi-modal and multi-operator, including more than one bus operator. However, in practice, where bus is the dominant mode a multi-operator bus ticket may be considered as integrated.

Introduction

Achieving greater 'integration' in public transport is a key theme in current transport policy in Scotland, the UK and further afield. Improved integration is viewed as essential to achieving key Scottish Executive policy objectives, including encouraging modal shift and promoting social inclusion.

Integration in public transport can operate at a number of different levels. It is important to distinguish between integrated routes, where services are designed so that passengers can make convenient connections between different transport modes, and integrated ticketing, where passengers can use the same ticket on different modes of transport or across different transport operators.

The current Scottish Executive White Paper, Scotland's Transport Future, states that the Scottish Executive is 'working to improve integration on three fronts - services, information and ticketing'. In relation to integrated ticketing, the White Paper states:

'We are committed to extending the provision of integrated tickets across Scotland and across all forms of public transport.'

The Scottish Executive hopes that integrated ticketing will make using public transport more convenient and therefore help to support increased usage and modal shift. However, in spite of the high level of interest in integrated ticketing in Scotland and elsewhere, there is a relative dearth of research evidence exploring the need or demand for such schemes or the practical issues involved in making integrated ticketing a success. The Scottish Executive therefore commissioned TNS Social Research, the Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) and the Transport Research Institute (TRi) at Napier University to conduct research to support the development and implementation of an Integrated Ticketing Strategy for Scotland.

Research aims and methodology

The key aims of the research were to provide an overview of the level of need and user demand for future integrated ticketing in Scotland and to inform the development of successful integrated ticketing schemes in the future. In order to meet these over-arching objectives, the research team was required to:

• explore definitions of integrated ticketing, in order to recommend a single definition for use by the Scottish Executive
• review current integrated ticketing provision in Scotland
• conduct an assessment of user demand for future integrated ticketing schemes
• establish best practice in integrated ticketing from Scotland, the UK and other countries
• establish the impact of integrated ticketing schemes elsewhere in the UK and internationally, particularly on public transport patronage and modal shift
• explore potential, longer-term impacts of integrated ticketing, e.g. on the levels and nature of services provided by different transport operators
• review barriers to introducing further integrated ticketing schemes in Scotland, including legislative barriers
• move forward the development of integrated ticketing in Scotland by proposing options for a maximum of three outline, multi-modal pilot integrated ticketing schemes.

In order to address these wide-ranging objectives, the research incorporated a variety of methods, including:

• a literature review and internet search
• a telephone survey of stakeholders, including operators, Passenger Transport Executives and local authorities
• case studies of four existing UK integrated ticketing schemes
• a review of legal and policy barriers to integrated ticketing, which also explored potential solutions to these barriers
• a household survey of 1,024 Scottish Adults across four 'travel-to-work' areas to provide evidence on potential take-up of future integrated ticketing schemes
• statistical modeling of potential demand for integrated ticketing in different areas of Scotland.

This document presents the main research findings thematically, drawing together key points from across the different strands of the research.

Defining integrated ticketing

Definitions of integrated ticketing were explored in the Literature Review and Stakeholder Survey. Both agree that (ideally), for a ticket to be described as 'integrated' it should be:

• Multi-modal, and
• Multi-operator (including more than one bus operator).

The notion that integrated tickets should, ideally, be multi-modal also received some support from the Household Survey where there appeared to be a higher level of interest in multi-modal compared with multi-operator tickets (though this did vary between areas, as discussed below). However, the stakeholder interviews raised some practical issues in relation to this 'ideal'. In particular, in areas where bus was the dominant mode and there are relatively few services on other modes, stakeholders felt that a multi-operator bus ticket could be classed as 'integrated'.

In general, both the Stakeholder Survey and the Household Survey suggest that integrated ticketing should be sufficiently flexible to enable it to meet different needs and demands in different areas/markets. For example, it appears that Household Survey respondents from rural areas were more interested in buying multi-modal tickets, while urban respondents were more interested in multi-operator bus tickets. The Stakeholder Survey also suggests that integrated tickets may target different markets in different areas - e.g. the tourist and leisure market in rural areas compared with commuters in urban areas. Different products would probably be required for these two types of travellers (e.g. flexible day-tickets vs. season tickets).

In terms of the appropriate area for an integrated ticket, both the coverage of existing schemes and views about optimum coverage varied widely, from fully national schemes to schemes covering single routes where there are multiple operators. Again, there appears to be a need for schemes to be sensitive to local markets. For each prospective scheme, the first question should be what types of trips do people in this area want to make? The appropriate area, modes and duration of tickets will stem from the answer to this question.

Effects on public transport patronage and modal shift

The research found a relative dearth of evidence on the precise extent to which existing schemes have had any effect on patronage and modal shift. In general, the strongest evidence of positive impact on patronage appears to originate from countries where integrated tickets are heavily subsidised and offer substantial discounts over both single-operator and single-journey tickets. For reasons connected with competition legislation, it is not possible for integrated ticketing schemes in the UK to under-cut the price of single-operator tickets.

The research also highlights the difficulty of separating the impact of integrated ticketing schemes from other improvements in public transport. Integrated ticketing schemes are often introduced in conjunction with other changes to public transport services, and indeed the research strongly suggests that they are likely to be more successful if this is the case. However, this does have the unfortunate side-effect of making it impossible (or at least very difficult) to measure the impact of integrated ticketing alone on patronage and modal shift.

However, in spite of the lack of quantifiable evidence there does appear to be a strong conviction among stakeholders in existing and potential schemes that integrated ticketing will result in advantages for passengers and other stakeholders, particularly where these are based around smartcards. Perceived benefits include improved transaction speed and better information on which to base services so that they are tailored to passenger demand.

Further, the Household Survey does suggest that there is passenger demand for integrated ticketing in Scotland and that this would encourage public transport patronage and modal shift among a small but significant proportion of people. Key findings include:

• Forty per cent of respondents indicated that they would buy a 'fully' integrated ticket if it cost either the same as their weekly transport costs or half this amount.
• Among these respondents, 58% said they would change the way they currently make journeys if they bought the ticket.
• The most commonly mentioned trips people might make differently were leisure day trips and visiting family and friends.
• Among people who would make these trips differently, over half previously made these types of trips by car but said that they would make them by public transport in the future, indicating potential for modal shift
• Among the small proportion (6% of all respondents) who would travel to work differently if they bought the ticket, again over two thirds previously travelled to work by car but suggested they would travel by public transport if they bought the integrated ticket.
• Thirty-four per cent of respondents indicated they would use public transport more often if they could buy multi-modal tickets, while 26% would use it more if they could buy multi-operator tickets.

The research therefore does indicate a potential for integrated ticketing to encourage patronage and modal shift, although previous studies identified by the Literature Review suggest that the proportion indicating that (a) they might buy an integrated ticket and (b) that this would change their travel patterns is likely to represent an over-estimation of the eventual impact of such schemes.

Integrated ticketing and other policies

While the general focus of the study was the extent to which integrated ticketing may contribute to modal shift and increase public transport patronage, the research also highlighted the potential for integrated ticketing to contribute to other policies, in particular supporting tourism and social inclusion.

Supporting tourism

• Participants in the Stakeholder interviews, particularly those from rural areas, suggested that leisure travellers were a key target market for integrated tickets and viewed promoting tourism as a key purpose of integrated ticketing.
• This suggestion was supported by the finding that among Household Survey respondents who would buy a 'fully' integrated ticket, the most common trip they anticipated making differently was leisure day trips.

Supporting social inclusion

• Stakeholders in rural areas were also more likely than those in urban areas to identify reducing social exclusion as an important objective for integrated ticketing.
• The Household Survey found that respondents from socio-economic groups D and E were more likely than those in groups ABC1 to state that if they bought a 'fully' integrated ticket they might make additional trips that they do not make at the moment. These trips tended to be for leisure or entertainment or to visit family and friends, suggesting that integrated ticketing might have a positive impact in increasing opportunities for leisure activities for those in socio-economic groups D and E.

Other potential longer-term benefits identified by the research include:

• Environmental benefits if integrated tickets are successful in encouraging modal shift
• Economic benefits, where integrated tickets are used to facilitate travel to or within a particular region
• Public health benefits, since it has been suggested that integrated tickets can (depending on their format and when they are purchased) reduce the number of actions required in a short-time when boarding a vehicle and may therefore benefit the elderly or those with mobility problems.

Thus while modal shift and improving public transport patronage may be the primary objectives of integrated ticketing the research does suggest that it can have a positive impact in other policy areas.

Best practice in integrated ticketing

The research suggests a number of key features associated with scheme success, based on both best practice and difficulties experienced by existing integrated ticketing schemes in Scotland, the UK and abroad:

• Integrated tickets should be sufficiently flexible in terms of modes and types of journey covered to meet the travel needs of as large a customer base as possible
• Successful integrated tickets are underpinned by integrated transport systems. The research strongly suggests that integrated ticketing will be more effective in encouraging patronage and modal shift if introduced in conjunction with other improvements to public transport.
• Schemes should offer a range of ticket durations, ideally permitting discounted frequent travel over defined short periods or further discounts for longer term commitments (e.g. commuting).
• An integrated ticket needs to be effectively and actively marketed. It needs to establish a recognisable brand that distinguishes it - and its advantages - from single-operator tickets. Marketing costs for successful schemes are high - requiring a budget in the start-up phase in the region of 10% of total sales.
• Successful schemes require strong operator buy-in. Possible routes for achieving this are discussed below under 'Barriers and solutions'.

Technology

Many large integrated ticketing schemes in the UK and abroad are now moving towards or already based upon Smartcard technology. Smartcard technology offers several key advantages over other ticketing formats. In particular:

• Smartcards have the potential to resolve issues around revenue distribution by enabling accurate measurement of actual passenger miles
• They facilitate the collection of more detailed passenger data which can assist operators and others in route planning, developing targeted products, etc.
• They have numerous potential applications other than simply transport, which may increase their value to users.

A card for Scotland, the 'Citizen Card', is currently under development, and may offer a cost-effective way of developing an integrated public transport ticket within Scotland. However, the Citizen Card is still in its planning stage and consequently its applicability as a flexible integrated ticket is not yet clear. Further, this study has identified a number of issues around smartcards which need to be addressed if their potential advantages are to be fully realised:

• First, it is unclear whether smartcards will be able to accurately measure passenger miles on buses, where exit from the vehicle is not monitored. Although the research has shown that this is not the only acceptable basis for revenue distribution, if smartcards are not able to provide an accurate measure of passenger miles on all participating modes, this does undermine some of the advantages claimed for them.
• Second, while smartcards clearly have the potential to provide very useful information to assist in transport planning, this needs to be balanced against the need to conform to data protection legislation and to prevent the misappropriation of any information collected.
• Third, it is not clear how interested the public is in smartcards per se, or whether they would see more value in a multi-functional card as distinct from a travel only card. There is some evidence from the Household Survey to suggest that some travellers who would be interested in buying integrated tickets would not be interested in the smartcard format. Further, the evidence from the Literature Review was somewhat inconclusive about whether people prefer specific travel-cards or multi-purpose cards.

None of these issues represent insurmountable obstacles to basing integrated ticketing schemes on smartcards. Issues around measuring passenger miles on buses may be resolved as technology progresses. Data protection issues can be handled through detailed guidance to those participating in schemes. Public education and marketing may overcome any initial resistance to smartcards. The introduction of the Citizen Card may also play an important role in improving acceptance of this technology and also presents opportunities to monitor and evaluate which functions of the card are most popular.

However, these issues do need to be taken into consideration as ticketing schemes and smartcard technology are developed. In particular, they suggest a need to closely monitor smartcard tickets in terms of:

• Effects on boarding/disembarking times
• How data protection issues are handled
• Whether potential passengers are deterred by smartcards
• The types of applications customers are actually interested in (i.e. transport and other uses)

Barriers (and solutions) to introducing integrated ticketing

This research has identified a range of potential barriers to the success of future integrated ticketing schemes, some real and some 'perceived', and has suggested potential solutions to each of these as follows:

• Achieving operator buy-in is an essential, but difficult requirement for any successful scheme, particularly in the context of voluntary participation. Key recommendations for achieving buy-in include finding 'scheme champion(s)', who are skilled negotiators and are trusted by all parties, to take new schemes through the set-up phase, and ensuring that the administration of the scheme is acceptable to participants.
• Allocating revenue in a manner that is perceived by operators to be equitable is also crucial to sustaining operator buy-in for a scheme. The principal barriers to achieving this in practice are the lack of a perfect methodology and cost, since the large-scale passenger surveys on which revenue allocation is frequently based are very expensive and can still be subject to a considerable degree of sampling error. An alternative to surveys may be to derive passenger miles from fare-distance relationships and fares taken on each operator's services. Smartcards may be able to facilitate revenue allocation in the future, although further development on their ability to monitor exit as well as entry on some modes needs to be done
• OFT regulations were found to be an important perceived barrier, in that some operators cite the complexity of competition regulations and the risk of draconian punishments for breaking them as a reason for not entering in to multi-operator schemes. However, this research found that in most cases OFT regulations were by no means insurmountable and that when those setting up schemes consulted the OFT they were usually able to resolve any concerns about the legality of the scheme. It may be, however, that the OFT does need to improve its 'public face', to encourage this dialogue with operators and other stakeholders in future schemes.
• The necessity for multi-operator tickets to cost more than single-operator tickets (a requirement of the OFT Block Exemption) may hamper the success of schemes if passengers are unwilling to pay such a premium. In practice, the most that can be said about the premium for future tickets in Scotland is that it should be as low as possible.
• Administration and marketing costs can be considerable, but without effective marketing new schemes are unlikely to be successful. In the start-up phase, the marketing budget is likely to exceed that which can be funded from ticket revenue and may need some subsidy.
• The attractiveness of integrated tickets is enhanced if they are able to include all public transport modes, where necessary. However, existing schemes have encountered some difficulties in securing the participation of rail-operators. Widespread acceptance of multi-operator tickets appears likely to occur only when rail franchise conditions allow for them.

Recommendations for pilot schemes

Three general types of area for future integrated ticketing scheme pilots are suggested based on the findings of the research conducted for this study on the necessary conditions for successful schemes and on likely passenger need and demand for tickets of different types:

• A rural area, which includes bus, rail and ferry services. This could particularly aim to make long-distance, infrequent travel easier for residents in relatively remote areas, but might also target the tourist market. Ticket-types and durations would need to reflect the requirements of these target groups. The scheme would probably be paper-based initially, and would be based on local bus, coach and ferry services and linked with long-distance rail services. Initial capital outlay would be relatively modest, and the scheme might be implemented within one or two years.
• A town scheme, focused around a travel 'hub' but including rural and relatively remote areas that might depend on the town for work, education, public services, etc. The scheme would probably be bus-based with some rail services, and might start with a paper format, though depending on the area selected there might be scope for introducing an electronic system. There would probably be a need to pump-prime such a scheme since sceptical or small local operators would be unlikely to provide the initial capital outlay. It might take two to three years to implement, or longer if based on an electronic system.
• A city scheme, possibly covering the central lowland conurbation. This scheme would particularly target commuters and would benefit from being based around smartcard technology given its likely size. It would also justify and benefit from being introduced alongside real-time passenger information linked to an urban traffic control system, since a large proportion of trips would be business related where reliability is key. It would be bus-based, but would also include rail, and possibly trams, underground services and demand responsive services. It is suggested that the Central Belt would be an ideal area for such a scheme, since there are currently examples of towns that fall just outside either the One-Ticket or SPT ZoneCard schemes. Further, there are many travellers who probably visit both regions regularly, or who fall within one scheme but make more regular trips to the area covered by the other. Such a scheme would probably take at least five years to establish but could provide an international model of efficient, integrated public transport service.