El pensamiento desde el análisis de conducta

Further to the analysis of willingness to pay for parking, an analysis was done on park-ing behaviour based on location. Those who live in Leppävaara are perhaps more will-ing to use other forms of transport because they are able to walk or take public transport more easily. On the other hand, they would be more affected by the parking fees. A comparison of behaviour between Leppävaara residents and non-Leppävaara residents is displayed in Figure 60. For this analysis Leppävaara residents were defined as the 125 people living within the 02600, 02660, and 02650 postcode areas, and non-Leppävaara residents were defined as the 141 participants from outside of these postcode areas. The reliability of these results is questionable, due to low response rates. Because of ran-domisation, each scenario question received about 70 responses on average. When this is further broken down into other categories this means that there may be only 35 re-sponses per category. It is important to keep this in mind when examining these results.

Figure 60. Changes in behaviour when visiting Leppävaara for shopping purposes for one hour under the dynamic parking scheme grouped by Leppävaara residents and non-Leppävaara residents

0 10 20 30 40 50

Would not travel at all Other transport mode Travel later and park in zone B Travel later Park outside of A and B Park in zone B Park outside of A and B Park in zone B Park outside of A and B No change to journey Park outside of A and B No change to journey

Because of the small sample size responding to this question, it is difficult to draw con-clusions unless there is an obvious difference between answering. One pattern that seems to emerge, is that Leppävaara residents are more likely use another transport mode, which is understandable considering that the shops are within walking distance or probably reachable with a direct public transport connection. It is also true that Leppävaara residents are more likely to be familiar with the area’s public transport timetables and the cost of a public transport ticket may be cheaper. For non-Leppävaara residents, distances are too large to consider walking, and public transport may involve making changes at some points of the journey.

The results suggest that when shopping in zone A at peak time, when they would be subject to a charge of 4€/hour, Leppävaara residents are more likely to make no change to journey than people from outside of Leppävaara. However, under different condi-tions, such as shopping in zone B at peak time and zone B at off peak time, Leppävaara residents are less likely to make no change to their journey. A possible explanation for this is that Leppävaara residents are used to shopping at the Sello shopping mall where the big supermarkets are located. They would like to travel by car because shopping trips often involve carrying heavy loads which are more difficult by other modes of transport. In zone B however, the shops are smaller and so a customer is less likely to buy several bags of groceries. This means that it is easier to transfer to other transport modes.

In most cases more non-Leppävaara residents say that they would not travel at all than Leppävaara residents. This is understandable, given that they can probably just as easily access an alternative shopping centre at a different location.

Comparison for work against location of resident is displayed in Figure 61.

Figure 61. Changes in behaviour when visiting Leppävaara for work purposes for one Travel later and park in zone B Travel later Park outside of A and B Park in zone B Park outside of A and B Park in zone B Park outside of A and B No change to journey Park outside of A and B No change to journey

For work purposes, it is interesting that Leppävaara residents seem far more willing to not travel at all than non-Leppävaara residents. One possible explanation for this is stra-tegic bias. Leppävaara residents would be more affected by parking fees and so they state they would not travel to the area in order to try and influence any future policy change.

In all cases, non-Leppävaara residents are more willing than residents to switch to an-other transport mode to access their destination. This may be coincidental produced by the unreliable low response rate and the presence of strategic bias amongst Leppävaara residents.

The comparison for social purposes against location of resident is displayed in Figure 62.

Figure 62. Changes in behaviour when visiting Leppävaara for social purposes for one Travel later and park in zone B Travel later Park outside of A and B Park in zone B Park outside of A and B Park in zone B Park outside of A and B No change to journey Park outside of A and B No change to journey

For social purposes, Leppävaara residents claim that they would be more likely not to make the trip than non-Leppävaara residents, if they had to pay for parking. This may another example of strategic bias, and it may also be because Leppävaara residents are more likely to make social visits more often, meaning that they would have to pay the fees more regularly.