The Perception of Bus Rapid Transit: A Passenger Survey From Beijing Southern Axis BRT Line 1

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/233087670
The perception of Bus Rapid Transit: A passenger survey from

Beijing Southern Axis BRT Line 1
Article in Transportation Planning and Technology · March 2012

DOI: 10.1080/03081060.2011.651885
CITATIONS READS
30 1,258
2 authors, including:
Taotao Deng
Shanghai University of Finance and Economics
18 PUBLICATIONS 439 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Taotao Deng on 29 May 2017.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

This article was downloaded by: [University of Aberdeen]
On: 21 February 2012, At: 09:40
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Transportation Planning and Technology

Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/gtpt20
The perception of Bus Rapid Transit: a

passenger survey from Beijing Southern
Axis BRT Line 1
a b
Taotao Deng & John D. Nelson
a
Institute of Finance and Economics, Shanghai University of
Finance and Economics, Shanghai, 200433, China
b
Centre for Transport Research, University of Aberdeen, Fraser
Noble Building, Aberdeen, AB24 3UE, UK
Available online: 21 Feb 2012
To cite this article: Taotao Deng & John D. Nelson (2012): The perception of Bus Rapid Transit: a
passenger survey from Beijing Southern Axis BRT Line 1, Transportation Planning and Technology,
35:2, 201-219
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03081060.2011.651885
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-

conditions
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation
that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any
instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary
sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,
demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
Vol. 35, No. 2, March 2012, 201219
The perception of Bus Rapid Transit: a passenger survey from Beijing

Southern Axis BRT Line 1
Taotao Denga and John D. Nelsonb*
a
Institute of Finance and Economics, Shanghai University of Finance and Economics
Shanghai 200433, China; bCentre for Transport Research, University of Aberdeen,
Fraser Noble Building, Aberdeen AB24 3UE, UK
Downloaded by [University of Aberdeen] at 09:40 21 February 2012
(Received 19 May 2010; accepted 4 October 2011)
Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) has emerged as a cost-effective transport system for
urban mobility. As a relatively new form of Mass Transit, its ability to provide a
high-quality transport service and potential to stimulate land development
remain largely unexplored. This study intends to investigate the public attitude
towards BRT services, as well as respondents’ perception of living near BRT
stations, using the Beijing Southern Axis BRT system as a case study. A data-set
of responses to 525 questionnaires were assembled and analysed using a
combination of statistical techniques. The results show that BRT has gained
great popularity among passengers, and brought about a positive impact on the
attractiveness of residential property. The data identify that the majority of
passengers are work-related commuters and use BRT more than once a day. The
captive users have a higher satisfaction than choice users with respect to
reliability, comfort & cleanliness and overall satisfaction with the BRT service.
It is argued that the BRT has significantly improved the attractiveness of
residential property along the BRT corridor.
Keywords: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT); perception; property attractiveness; Beijing
1. Introduction
For many years rail-based transport systems, such as Metro and Light Rail Transit
(LRT), have been the preferred public transport improvement options of planners
and policy-makers alike. However, the high capital cost and subsequent high
operating cost associated with these modes have limited its development in many
budget-constrained cities. Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) presents a cost-effective and
flexible alternative for high-performance transit services which has increasingly
gained interest from policy-makers. A typical BRT system combines exclusive
busway, technologically-advanced vehicles, upgraded stations, rapid fare collection,
advanced Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) technologies and a flexible service
plan. Case studies summarised by Levinson et al. (2003) and Wright and Hook
(2007) have demonstrated that BRT can be a very cost-effective way of providing a
high-quality, high-performance transport service. Mass Transit generally has a strong
potential to influence travel behaviour and promote property development by
generating significant accessibility benefits. There has been much previous research
*Corresponding author. Email: j.d.nelson@abdn.ac.uk

ISSN 0308-1060 print/ISSN 1029-0354 online
# 2012 Taylor & Francis
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03081060.2011.651885
http://www.tandfonline.com
202 T. Deng and J.D. Nelson
focusing on the influence of rail transit (Metro and LRT) on travel behaviour change
and land development. However, there has been less attention to specifically
capturing the passengers’ attitude towards BRT and the assessment of the likely
impacts of BRT on the local property market.
To address this important information gap, the objectives of the study presented
in this article are to answer the following questions, using the Beijing Southern Axis
BRT system as a case study:
(1) What are the travel-related characteristics of BRT passengers?

(2) How do passengers perceive the service quality of BRT?
(3) Do passengers consider that BRT has had a positive impact on the
attractiveness of residential property?
The article is organised as follows: Section 2 presents a brief introduction to the

Beijing Southern Axis BRT system, Section 3 describes the methodology for data
collection adopted in this study. The main body of the article (Section 4) describes
the outcome of the analysis focusing in turn on the demographic profile of
respondents, their travel-related characteristics, including their perception of service
quality, and their perception of living near a BRT station. The article concludes with
comments about those factors which contribute to the successful introduction of a
BRT system.
2. Description of the Beijing Southern Axis BRT System

With the rapid economic growth and urbanisation, vehicle use in Beijing has grown
very rapidly during the past decade, as is indicated in Figure 1.
The increase in the number of vehicles, particularly private cars is remarkable: in
1998 there were only 177,000 cars, while in 2007 there were 1,463,000 cars, an
eightfold increase of private cars in only 9 years. Rapid motorisation has caused
serious traffic congestion. According to the Beijing Traffic Management Bureau, the
average roadway speeds in the urban core district dropped from 45 km/h in 1994 to
less than 20 km/h in 2003; the average speed of buses declined from 16.7 km/h to
9.2 km/h (Zhang and Gao 2008).
350 Total Vehicles

Number of vehicles (1000 units)
300 Automobiles
Cars
250
200
150
100
50
0
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Figure 1. Growth trend of registered vehicles, automobiles and cars in Beijing (19782007).
Source: Beijing Statistical Yearbook, 20002008.
Transportation Planning and Technology 203
Rapidly worsening traffic congestion has prompted decision-makers to look for

Mass Transit systems to mitigate traffic problems. During the past decade, heavy
investments have been made on building rail systems, especially the Metro and LRT,
to meet the massive travel demands. While the rail system has shown impressive
technical performance, high construction costs and operating deficits have resulted in
heavy financial pressure. The Beijing authority has been faced with increasing
difficulties in paying off the debts, subsidising Metro and LRT operation, and
expanding the rail network. Therefore, policy-makers are seeking a more affordable
way to provide a high-quality transport service. Inspired by some successful BRT
systems, such as in Curitiba (Brazil) and Bogota (Colombia), construction of a bus-
based rapid transit scheme has been adopted as a cost-effective approach to
providing a high quality transport service.
The Southern Axis BRT Line 1 (Figure 2) is the first BRT line built in China. It
started commercial operations in December 2004, connecting Beijing southern area

with the downtown area. It has adopted many LRT features, and incorporates a
dedicated busway, modern vehicles, enhanced stations, off-board fare collection and
various ITS tools. This rubber-tyred transit system has achieved almost 40% travel
time reduction and high ridership (average daily trips around 150,000 in a single
corridor) since opening, with only 1/15 the capital cost of a Metro line (Darido 2006,
Lin and Wu 2007, Chang 2008, cited in Deng and Nelson 2009).
3. Methodology
Since passengers are users and direct beneficiaries of a BRT service, the extent of
their satisfaction represents a critical indicator of evaluation. Only a high-quality
transport system can attract new passengers and improve the experience of existing
passengers, and possibly stimulate land development. To gain insight into the public
attitude to the BRT services in Beijing and to explore the perception of living near
BRT stations, a questionnaire was designed and conducted in August 2009.
1. Advanced vehicle
2. Enhanced station
3. Off-board fare collection
4. Screen door system
5. Exclusive busway
6. Barrier
7. Overpass
Figure 2. Beijing Southern Axis BRT Line 1.

Source: this study.
3.1. Questionnaire design

A questionnaire was designed to investigate public attitude to the BRT services and
the perception of living near BRT stations. The questionnaire was first developed in
English and then translated into Chinese. The questionnaire is divided into three
parts, with a short introduction to explain the purpose, person in charge and a
guarantee of the respondent’s anonymity, as follows:
Part I concerns respondents’ travel behaviour and attitude toward the BRT
service. Respondents were asked to indicate their trip characteristics, such as
trip purpose and trip frequency, and rate the service of the BRT based on a
five-point scale of satisfaction, ranging from ‘very dissatisfied’ to ‘very
satisfied’.
Part II investigates respondents’ perception of living near BRT stations.
Respondents who live near a BRT station (defined as close enough to walk to
the station) were asked about their place of residence, such as when they moved
there and how far away it is from a station.
In Part III respondents were asked to provide demographic information,
including gender, age-range, education, occupation, personal income and
whether they have a car alternative.
3.2. Sampling method

3.2.1. Time of data collection
Since passengers’ travel behaviour varies between weekdays and weekend, the data
collection was conducted on two weekdays (12 and 13 August 2009) and one
weekend day (15 August 2009). The survey was conducted during morning rush,
mid-day, afternoon rush and evening period to minimise bias caused by sampling
time. There were no mega-events, such as a national congress or international sports
festival, or car accidents during the survey, which could have substantial impact on
the survey validity.
3.2.2. Survey location

The BRT route starts from Qianmen (city centre) to Demaozhuang (a southern
residential area), running through 17 stations, as indicated in Figure 3.
Questionnaires were distributed on vehicle and at BRT station areas which involve
frequent passenger loading and unloading.
3.2.3. Selection of respondents

The surveyors randomly stopped and asked passengers to fill out the questionnaire.
After explaining the purpose of the survey, the respondents were left alone to
complete the questionnaire. The surveyors remained in the vicinity making sure that
respondents could get a prompt explanation if required. After finishing the
questionnaire, each respondent was rewarded with a thank you gift.
Figure 3. The route and stations of Beijing Southern Axis BRT Line 1.
Source: based on the map from http://map.sogou.com/
Prior to data collection, a pilot survey was carried out to test the effectiveness of
the questionnaire. Questionnaires were distributed on 23 July 2009. A total of 25
passengers were randomly chosen to pilot the questionnaire. The questionnaire was
refined and finalised based on the feedback from passengers and consultation with
transport professionals.
4. Data analysis
A total of 600 questionnaires were distributed and 525 were valid for further
analysis. The remaining 62 questionnaires contained either partial information or
were not useable. The effective response rate for the survey was 87.5%. The high
rate of usable questionnaires was due to pre-survey planning, careful survey
procedure and passengers’ active participation. The collected data were system-
atically coded and arranged using SPSS. The data analysis was conducted in two
stages. Firstly, the descriptive statistics method was used to analyse the travel-
related characteristics between captive users (N 65) and choice users (N 460).
Secondly, results from respondents who lived near BRT stations (N 228) were
examined to explore BRT’s potential capability to increase residential property

attractiveness.
4.1. Demographic profile of respondents (N 525)

In this analysis, the BRT users are divided into two groups, BRT captive users and
BRT choice users.
Captive users are referred to as those who do not have a car alternative for their
journey.
Choice users are referred to as those who use BRT even though they have a car
alternative.
According to the survey, 65 of the 525 sample passengers (12.4%) said they had a car
alternative for the journey, but they still chose to use the BRT. The respondent profile
is summarised in Table 1.
The following conclusions may be drawn from Table 1.
4.1.1. Gender
Taken as a whole, there were more male respondents (54.1%) than female
respondents (45.9%). The malefemale ratio of respondents (1.18) is slightly higher
than the male-female ratio of Beijing population (1.03) in 2008. One possible reason
is that in developing countries the head of household is generally male and travels
more. Surprisingly, the malefemale ratio of choice users is merely 0.667, suggesting
that female choice users are more likely to use BRT.
4.1.2. Age group

Taken as a whole, the great majority of respondents (66.5%) were aged between
18 and 34, followed by those aged from 35 to 49 (20.4%) and minors (7.0%). There
were many less seniors: passengers aged between 50 and 65 accounted for 5.5%;
passengers aged over 65 only accounted for 0.6%. In China, elders generally live
and travel with their children. In urban areas, crowding problems associated with
public transport use occur quite often and cause enormous inconvenience to
seniors and thus reduce their travel frequency. As for choice users, 92.3% were aged
from 18 to 49.
4.1.3. Education level

Taken as a whole, 38.9% of sampled passengers possessed a senior high school
education and 27.4% had a college-level education; 21.1% had completed university
studies and 3.6% had postgraduate education. Important differences were reported
for education level for captive users and choice users. A larger percentage of choice
users had a university degree than captive users.
Table 1. Demographic profile of respondents.
All BRT users Captive users Choice users

(N525) (N460) (N 65)
Social-economic characteristics N% N% N%
Gender Male 284 54.1 258 56.1 26 40.0

Female 241 45.9 202 43.9 39 60.0
Age (years) B18 37 7.0 36 7.8 1 1.5
1834 349 66.5 318 69.1 31 47.7

3549 108 20.6 79 17.2 29 44.6
5065 28 5.3 24 5.2 4 6.2
Over 65 3 0.6 3 0.7 0 0
Education Junior high school or below 47 9.0 46 10.0 1 1.5
level Senior high school 204 38.9 191 41.5 13 20.0
College graduate 144 27.4 128 27.8 16 24.6
University graduate 111 21.1 83 18.0 28 43.1
Postgraduate 19 3.6 12 2.6 7 10.8
Occupation Civil servant 13 2.5 8 1.7 5 7.7
Scientific workers and teachers 27 5.1 21 4.6 6 9.2
Private company staff 196 37.3 164 35.7 32 49.2
Self-employed 86 16.4 76 16.5 10 15.4
Student 77 14.7 75 16.3 2 3.1
Worker 47 9.0 46 10.0 1 1.5
Farmer 5 1.0 5 1.1 0 1.5
Soldier 7 1.3 6 1.3 1 1.5
Retired 13 2.5 13 2.8 0 0
Unemployed 8 1.5 8 1.7 0 0
Other 46 8.8 38 8.3 8 12.3
Income level Under ¥ 2000 191 36.4 189 41.1 2 3.1
¥ 2000¥ 3999 222 42.3 194 42.2 28 43.1
¥ 4000¥ 5999 84 16.0 63 13.7 21 32.3
207
¥ 6000¥ 7999 23 4.4 11 2.4 12 18.5
¥ 8000 or more 5 1.0 3 0.7 2 3.1
Note: ¥ (RMB) is the currency used in the China. US$1000 ¥ 6350 (October 2011).
Source: this study.
4.1.4. Occupation
Taken as a whole, respondents were found to come from a variety of social
backgrounds. Not surprisingly, company staff (37.3%) and self-employed (16.4%)
were the main divisions of occupation for respondents. Company staff accounted for
an even higher level of choice users (49.2%). One possible reason is that many people
take BRT to access the companies locating in the downtown or near the BRT
corridor. Due to the reduced impact of traffic congestion encountered by BRT
during the rush hour, BRT is of great interest to company staff.
4.1.5. Personal monthly income

Taken as a whole, the majority of respondents had a monthly income between ¥2000
(£180) and ¥3999 (£360), suggesting that BRT is a popular transport mode for the
working class; 36.0% of passengers sampled earned less than ¥2000. This is expected
since, as noted earlier, students accounted for 14.7% of respondents. Not surpris-
ingly, personal monthly income in China is much lower than that in developed
countries. However, it is assumed that the real monthly income is slightly higher than
that reported in the survey. One possible reason is that the reimbursement and
bonuses are sometimes not calculated in the personal monthly income by some
people. As for choice users, they generally received a higher income.
4.1.6. Modal shift

Compared to the modal shift by those who previously used private car reported by
other BRT schemes, such as 14% on the TransJakarta in Jakarta (Indonesia) (ITDP
2005), 19% on the Fastrack in Kent Thameside (UK) (Fastrack Delivery Executive
2006) and 18% on the Los Angeles Orange Line (Callaghan and Vincent 2007), the
percentage of modal shift on BRT Line 1 (12.4%) does not seem very high. However,
it is important to note that the surveyed modal shift from private car is already very
encouraging, considering that car ownership in Beijing is generally lower than many
Main motivation to use BRT
Other 1
Less environmental impact 4
Unable to drive 17
Car unavailable 9
BRT is more convenient 34
0 10 20 30 40
Number of respondents
Figure 4. Main motivation for choice users to use BRT (N 65).

Source: this study.
western cities. The evidence that car users are willing to use the BRT system suggests
that a high-quality bus-based rapid transit can attract modal shift.
Those respondents with a car alternative were further asked to state the main
purpose of choosing the BRT service rather than using their own car (Figure 4). Of
these, 34 respondents, more than half (52.3%), believed that BRT was more
convenient than car for their trip, suggesting that BRT is a competitive alternative
to the private car. Seventeen passengers (26.2%) said they could not drive the car for
some reason and nine passengers (13.8%) stated the car was unavailable for their trip
on that day. It is interesting to note that four respondents (6.2%) were concerned
about the negative impact of car on the environment and therefore would like to use
public transport. Although this figure is very small, it provides evidence on the
environmental awareness, and suggests that environmental impact is an emerging
factor of concern in China.
4.2. Travel-related characteristics of BRT users

The following characteristics of respondents were examined in the survey.
4.2.1. The trip purpose of respondents

Taken as a whole, the majority of passengers (47.4%) were work-related commuters,
37.7% of respondents were travelling to work and 9.7% were travelling on business.
The percentage of work-related trips is higher than that reported in the third
comprehensive transport survey (40.4%), covering all passengers by all transport
modes, conducted in 2005 by Beijing Transportation Research Centre (2007). This is
consistent with the findings from respondents’ occupation in this study (company
staff and self-employed were the main categories of occupation). However, it is
interesting to note that work-related commuters in the 2009 survey accounted for less
than that in the 2007 survey (Chen et al. 2008) on the BRT Line 1, which recorded
61.8% of respondents used the BRT to travel to work or travel on business. This may
suggest that Beijing BRT Line 1 is not just providing a commuting service, but also
gradually being integrated into local community activities along the BRT corridor.
After two years of operation, passengers on BRT Line 1 heading for shopping and
recreation activities rose from 20.1% to 33.7%.
As can be seen from Figure 5, the percentage of ‘Travel to work’ for choice users
is almost twice as that of captive users. Since the BRT route connects to the Metro
network, it is more reliable to travel by a Mass Transit system than private car during
the rush hour. Clearly, recreational activities and shopping by public transport are
less popular with choice users, indicating that BRT is less competitive than car for
social activities in their spare time.
4.2.2. How passengers previously undertake their journey before the operation of BRT
Figure 6 presents the respondents’ previous modes of travel prior to the introduction
of the BRT system. As illustrated, public transport systems (Bus/Metro/LRT),
walking and cycling were the main modes used. Travel by bus accounted for the
largest proportion (75.4%) of the total passengers surveyed. This is mainly because
many conventional bus lines in the south-centre traffic corridor were cancelled or
Figure 5. A comparison of trip purpose for captive users (N 460) and choice users
(N65).
Source: this study.
shortened, after the opening of BRT Line 1. In total, 6.1% of current users have
changed their mode of travel from car (1.9%) or taxi (4.2%) to BRT service. It is
worth noting that 7.2% of trips on the BRT Line 1 were new trips, which were highly
likely to have been generated by the BRT. BRT’s ability to attract new trips was also
observed at other locations including the Brisbane South East Busway (Rathwell and
Schijns 2002), Adelaide North East Busway (Currie 2006), Las Vegas MAX system,
Boston MBTA, Berkeley AC Transit BRT system (Peak et al. 2005) and Los Angeles
Didn’t make Others, 1.0%

trip, 7.2%
Metro/LRT, Walking Bicycle/
1.7% 5.7% Electric bicycle,
2.9%
Taxi, 4.2%
Car, 1.9%
Bus, 75.4%
Figure 6. Previous transport mode used to take the same journey (N 525).
Source: this study.
Orange Line (Callaghan and Vincent 2007). Peak et al. (2005) indicated that the rail-
like characteristics of BRT could provide a high level of service and significantly
improve public transport satisfaction and popularity.
4.2.3. Transport mode normally used to access a BRT station

Taken as a whole, an overwhelming majority of respondents (96.2%) took green
transport modes to access the BRT station by bus (46.7%), walking (33.9%),
Metro/LRT (9.5%) and cycling (6.1%). It is worth noting that only 6.1% of
respondents used a bicycle to access BRT. According to the field survey, the lack
of proper bicycle parking areas might be the main reason that passengers did not like
using bicycles to access BRT. As can be seen clearly from Figure 7, walking (52.3%) is
the most common way for choice users to access BRT. It is worth noting that very
few choice users (merely 3.1%) parked the car and then used the BRT. It appears that
the concept of ‘park and ride’ (P&R) is still underdeveloped in China. This P&R
figure is much lower than the survey of Los Angeles Orange Line, where it was
observed that 13% of all riders arrived at the station via car (Callaghan and Vincent
2007). One possible reason is that the car ownership in China is much lower than in
North America. More importantly, the lack of proper P&R facilities discourages
people to switch from car use.
4.2.4. Frequency of travel by BRT

Taken as a whole, the largest proportion of respondents (41.1%) used BRT more than
once a day. This trend is also apparent with choice users where it is as high as 44.6%,
shown in Figure 8. One possible reason is that BRT may have certain loyal car
Figure 7. Transport mode used to access BRT by captive users (N 460) and choice users
(N65).
Source: this study.
Figure 8. Comparison of trip frequency for captive users (N460) and choice users
(N65).
Source: this study.
owners, who always use BRT to travel to work everyday. It is interesting to note that
respondents who used BRT 1 time/day only account for 10.7% of the total sampled
passengers. One possible explanation is that people usually use the same transport
mode for a return trip.
4.2.5. Evaluation of the BRT service

Evaluation of the BRT service is measured on a five-point scale, where ‘1’ is very
dissatisfied and ‘5’ is very satisfied. Seven attributes, including speed, reliability,
safety, convenience, frequency, comfort & cleanliness and overall service quality, are
measured, as indicated in Figure 9.
The results clearly show that respondents have strong positive opinions on the
BRT service. In total, 85.5% of passengers rated overall satisfaction with the BRT
service as ‘very satisfied’ or ‘satisfied’. In particular, respondents thought BRT was
fast and convenient. Totally, 88.4% and 85.5% of respondents rated ‘Speed’ and
‘Convenience’ as ‘very satisfied’ and ‘satisfied’, respectively. This information is in
accordance with the findings from Australasian BRT systems (Adelaide North East
Busway, Brisbane South East Busway, Brisbane Inner Northern Busway and Sydney
Liverpool-Parramatta Transitway) (Currie 2006) and Los Angeles Orange Line
(Cain et al. 2009): with the improvement of service quality (high speed, reliability,
safety, comfort and user-friendly design), BRT systems have a positive impact on
customer satisfaction. Negative comments primarily relate to the frequency of
service and interior of vehicle; 6.3% and 5.2% of respondents are dissatisfied with
‘Frequency’ and ‘Comfort & Cleanliness’ of BRT, respectively. In reality, the BRT
Line 1 has already achieved a very high frequency (headway: 1.5 min during the peak
and 23 min off peak). One possible reason is that passengers always wish that the
transit system could be ready to go whenever they come to the stations.
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
very satisfied
satisfied
0% neutral
dissatisfied
very dissatisfied
Figure 9. Satisfaction rate to the BRT service (N525).

Source: this study.
An independent-samples t-test was conducted to examine whether there is a

significant difference in the perception of BRT service factors between choice users
and captive users. Three factors (reliability, comfort & cleanliness and overall
satisfaction) were found to be significantly different between choice users and captive
users within a 95% confidence interval as indicated in Table 2.
Table 2. Comparison of the mean satisfaction score of BRT service for captive users and
choice users.
Attributes Choice users (N65) Captive users (N 460) p-Values
Speed 4.25 4.35 0.307

Reliability 3.95 4.17 0.044*
Safety 4.12 4.26 0.160
Convenience 4.31 4.30 0.955
Frequency 3.82 3.98 0.167
Comfort & cleanliness 3.63 3.97 0.03*
Overall satisfaction 3.97 4.16 0.032*
Source: this study.
*Indicates significance level B 0.05.
These results suggest that captive users do have a higher satisfaction than choice
users on reliability, comfort & cleanliness and overall satisfaction of BRT service,
showing that those with a car alternative have a higher expectation of BRT than
choice users.
4.2.6. Suggestions for improvement

A large number of passengers complained of the overcrowding problem. Their
suggestions for improving the BRT service mainly relate to the enhancement of BRT
capacity, particularly in terms of the need to launch more BRT routes and extend the
hours of service. In addition, some passengers complained about the vehicle interior
and shelters at BRT stations. The vehicle interior was not always kept clean and the
shelter in the BRT station could not provide all passengers with effective protection
from the bad weather.
4.3. Respondents’ perception of living near BRT stations

Respondents were asked to indicate whether they lived within walking distance from a
BRT station. In response, 43.4% of passengers (N 228) were local residents who lived
near a BRT station, while 56.6% of passengers (N 297) did not live near any BRT
station. The key characteristics of the residents’ profile are summarised in Table 3.
The following issues were explored in the questionnaire.
4.3.1. Date when residents moved to be near the BRT corridor

In the following discussion, it is pertinent to note that from proposal to trial
operation, the time span of implementing BRT Line 1 is relatively short, as indicated
in Figure 10.
Figure 11 shows that 35.1% of respondents moved within walking distance from a
BRT station prior to the announcement of the BRT project in 2003. During the
construction of the BRT system, 7.5% of respondents moved to the BRT catchment
area. When the first stretch of BRT (just 5.5 km long) opened in December 2004, it
appears that it did not make a big difference in terms of attracting a large number of
Table 3. Key characteristics of the local residents’ profile: all respondents within the walking
distance from a BRT station.
Demographics Travel behaviour Satisfaction to use BRT
52.7% male 52.2% work-related Highly satisfied with BRT service

trip
85.9% aged from 66.8% use BRT Joint top three main consideration to take
18 to 49 at least once a day BRT service: speed, reliability and
convenience
50.0% had at least a 61.5% walk to a
college education BRT station
58.9% earned ¥ 2000
5999
Source: this study.
Project Development
BRT Feasibility Construction Trial Full
Proposal Study Phrase Operation Operation
Year
March 2003 April 2003 Early 2004 December 2004 December 2005
Figure 10. Timeline of implementing Beijing Southern Axis BRT Line 1.

Source: this study.
residents, merely 7.0% of the sample. Clearly, after extending the BRT corridor to
16.5 km in December 2005, residential properties near BRT stations became more
attractive. A large majority of respondents (46.1%) moved to a place near BRT

stations after the full operation of BRT Line 1 commenced in December 2005.
Although residential location choices are affected by complex factors, it may be
inferred that proximity to the BRT corridor can reduce the time and money cost of
commuting, and this has significantly improved the property attractiveness near
BRT. In a survey (Deng and Nelson 2010) of local real estate agents who specialise in
the property market within the BRT corridor area, it was concluded that BRT Line 1
has a high profile within the local property market. To many customers, BRT was
fundamental to their interest in the local area. From the perspective of local real
estate agents, properties adjacent to BRT stations benefit from accessibility
enhancement. It was suggested that the property value uplift conferred by the
BRT mostly occurred after its full operation.
4.3.2. Distance from respondents’ houses to their nearest station

Figure 12 shows the actual distance from respondents’ residence to the nearest BRT
station, indicating the attractiveness distance of BRT in the southern suburban area.
More than half of respondents (68.5%) lived within a 500 m radius around BRT
50% 46.1%
45%
40%
35.1%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10% 7.5% 7.0%
4.4%
5%
0%
Before 2003 2003 2004 2005 After 2005
Figure 11. Residential relocation time of respondents (N 228).

Source: this study.
30%
25.9% 27.2%
25%
20%
17.5%
15.4%
15% 14.0%
10%
5%
0%
<100m 100m-199m 200m-499m 500m-999m 1000m or more
Figure 12. Distance from respondents’ residence to the nearest BRT station (N 228).
Source: this study.
stations, comprising as follows: those who lived less than 100 m (15.4%), between 100
and 199 m (27.2%), and from 200 to 499 m (25.9%). A further 17.5% lived between
500 and 999 m distance to the BRT. It is worth noting that 14.0% of respondents
travelled over 1000 m to take the BRT service, among whom 68.8% used BRT at least
1 time/day, 50% took a bus and 31.2% walked to a BRT station. It can be concluded
that as a major transport improvement project in the Beijing southern area which
connects with the Metro network, the BRT Line 1 has greatly improved accessibility
for communities and produced a large attractiveness distance.
4.3.3. Preference to move nearer a BRT station

The 297 passengers who did not live near any BRT station (beyond the reasonable
walking distance) were asked about their preference to move nearer a BRT station. As
No opinion,
No 1.3%
preference,
20.2%
Yes,
49.5%
No,
29.0%
Figure 13. Preference for relocation nearer a BRT station (N 297).

Source: this study.
indicated in Figure 13, most people (49.5%) were interested in living along the BRT
corridor. This information is in accord with the finding from a survey of real estate
agents which revealed that BRT was fundamental to many customers‘ interest in the
apartments in areas local to the BRT system (Deng and Nelson 2010). In this survey
only 29.0% of respondents (N 297) did not show interest in housing near a BRT
station. There are mainly five reasons for this lack of interest: (1) some respondents
were visiting Beijing and would not buy or rent any house in Beijing; (2) some people
get heavily subsidised accommodation from their work unit; (3) some people worked
in a place which was distant from the BRT corridor; (4) some people could not afford
housing near the BRT corridor; and (5) some respondents paid more attention to
other public resources, such as high-quality schools and attractive scenery.
5. Discussion and conclusion

BRT schemes are being successfully adopted in many budget-constrained cities as a
promising strategy for relieving traffic problems. The research discussed in this article
contributes to the on-going investigation of the impacts of BRT on travel behaviour
change and property development. In accordance with empirical evidence observed
elsewhere, such as Jakarta TransJakarta (ITDP 2005), Kent Fastrack (Fastrack
Delivery Executive 2006) and Los Angeles Orange Line (Callaghan and Vincent
2007), the outcome of this survey supports the arguments that an appropriately
designed and operated BRT system offers an innovative approach to providing a
high-quality transport service, which can attract modal shift from private cars, and
generate many new trips. Passengers of the BRT system benefit from improved
service quality: travel time savings, better on-time performance and improved travel
convenience and comfort. The results from Beijing Southern Axis BRT Line 1 show
that 75.4% of all respondents were previous bus customers; that 47.4% were work-
related commuters and 41.1% used BRT more than once a day. Also, 46.7% normally
used a bus to access BRT while 33.9% generally walked to a BRT station. Although
passengers are generally content with the BRT service, 85.5% of passengers rated
overall satisfaction of the BRT service as ‘very satisfied’ or ‘satisfied’; it was revealed
that the captive users have a higher satisfaction than choice users in terms of
reliability, comfort & cleanliness and overall satisfaction of BRT service. Complaints
from all respondents were mainly about overcrowding problems, suggesting more
BRT routes should be implemented and integrated with the Metro network.
The questions about residential location suggest that 66.8% of sampled
residents used BRT at least once a day, 52.2% were engaged in work-related trips
and 61.5% normally walked to a BRT station. The BRT Line 1 has a large
attractiveness distance, which has attracted 14.0% of respondents to travel over
1000 m, mainly by bus or walking, to take the service. A large majority of
respondents (46.1%) had moved to a place near BRT stations after the full
operation of BRT Line 1 in December 2005, suggesting that proximity to the BRT
corridor can reduce the time and money cost of commuting, and this has
significantly improved the attractiveness of property near BRT. Furthermore,
49.5% of non-locally resident respondents showed interest in residential properties
along the BRT corridor. A recent study quantifying the impact of BRT Line 1 on
the value of residential apartments in a series of catchment and control areas
(Deng and Nelson 2010) found that the average price of apartments adjacent to a
BRT station has gained a relatively faster increase than those not served by the
BRT system. The capitalisation effect mostly occurs after the full operation of BRT,
and is more evident over time and particularly observed in areas which lack
alternative mobility opportunities.
As a relatively new rapid transit mode, the full impact of BRT remains largely
unexplored. The main attraction of BRT to policy-makers is that it could be a
cost-effective approach to moving a large number of people. It is increasingly
accepted that in common with other forms of Mass Transit systems, a full-
featured BRT has the potential to offer more benefits. From the survey of Beijing
BRT Line 1, it can be concluded that this BRT system has successfully taken
advantage of the characteristics of rail systems in a cost-efficient way. It is rapidly
becoming a viable option for transport improvement which could significantly
improve the service level of public transport and enhance attractiveness of local
property.
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge support from the China Scholarship Council, which provided a
Ph.D. candidate research grant. The authors also acknowledge the financial support from the
Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) in conducting the fieldwork. The authors
wish to thank Professor Bill Neill, Dr Jillian Anable and Mr. Brian Masson from the
University of Aberdeen for their comments on the questionnaires.
References
Beijing Transportation Research Centre, 2007. ,
Beijing. [Brief Report of the Third Comprehensive Transport Survey, Beijing]. Beijing
Transportation Research Centre.
Cain, A., et al., 2009. Quantifying the importance of image and perception to Bus Rapid Transit.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration,
Office of Research, Demonstration and Innovation (TRI).
Callaghan, L. and Vincent, W., 2007. Preliminary evaluation of metro orange line Bus Rapid
Transit project. Transportation Research Record, 2034, 3744.
Chang, S.K., 2008. Comparison of BRT systems in Beijing and Changzhou. 7th Asia-Pacific
transportation development conference & 21st ICTPA annual meeting, Nanjing, China, http://
ce11012.ce.ntu.edu.tw/brt080525.pdf [Accessed June 2009].
Chen, Z.Y., Shi, J., and Yuan, J., 2008. User satisfaction survey and comparison analysis on
Beijing Bus Rapid Transit. Journal of Wuhan University of Technology (Transportation
Science & Engineering), 32 (5), 802805.
Currie, G., 2006. Bus Rapid Transit in Australasia: performance, lessons learned and futures.
Journal of Public Transportation, BRT Special Edition, 9 (3), 122.
Darido, G., 2006. Bus Rapid Transit developments in China: perspectives from research,
meetings, and site visits in April 2006. Washington, DC: Federal Transit Administration,
U.S. Department of Transportation.
Deng, T. and Nelson, J.D. 2009. Analysis of an efficient urban transport system: lessons
learned from Beijing Southern Axis Bus Rapid Transit Line 1. In: D. Wang and S. Li, eds.
Proceedings of the 14th HKSTS international conference, Vol. 2, 1012 December, Hong
Kong: HKST, 719727.
Deng, T. and Nelson, J.D. 2010. The impact of Bus Rapid Transit on land development: a case
study of Beijing, China. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 66, 1196
1206.
Fastrack Delivery Executive, 2006. Could not improve any more what more could want?
Passenger comment, October 2006 surveys [online]. Available from: www.go-fastrack.co.uk
[Accessed November 2009].
Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP), 2005. Making TransJakarta a
world class BRT system: final recommendations of the Institute for Transportation and
Development Policy [online]. Available from: www.itdp.org/read [Accessed November
2008].
Levinson, H., et al. 2003. TCRP Report 90: Bus Rapid Transit, vol. 1. Washington, DC: Case
Studies in Bus Rapid Transit, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies.
Lin, Z. and Wu, J.Q., 2007. Summary of the application effects of Bus Rapid Transit at Beijing
South-Centre Corridor of China. Journal of Transportation Systems Engineering and
Information Technology, 7 (4), 137142.
Peak, M., Henke, C., and Wnuk, L., 2005. Bus Rapid Transit ridership analysis. Washington,
DC: Federal Transit Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation.
Rathwell, S. and Schijns, S., 2002. Ottawa and Brisbane: comparing a Mature Busway System
with its state-of-the-art progeny. Journal of Public Transportation, 5 (2), 163189.
Wright, L. and Hook, W., 2007. Bus Rapid Transit planning guide. New York: Institute for
Transportation & Development Policy.
Zhang, W.Z. and Gao, X.L., 2008. Spatial differentiations of traffic satisfaction and its policy
implications in Beijing. Habitat International, 32 (4), 437451.
View publication stats

The Perception of Bus Rapid Transit: A Passenger Survey From Beijing Southern Axis BRT Line 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Perception of Bus Rapid Transit: A Passenger Survey From Beijing Southern Axis BRT Line 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

The perception of Bus Rapid Transit: A passenger survey from

Article in Transportation Planning and Technology · March 2012

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Transportation Planning and Technology

The perception of Bus Rapid Transit: a

Available online: 21 Feb 2012

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03081060.2011.651885

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-

The perception of Bus Rapid Transit: a passenger survey from Beijing

(Received 19 May 2010; accepted 4 October 2011)

*Corresponding author. Email: j.d.nelson@abdn.ac.uk

(1) What are the travel-related characteristics of BRT passengers?

The article is organised as follows: Section 2 presents a brief introduction to the

2. Description of the Beijing Southern Axis BRT System

350 Total Vehicles

Rapidly worsening traffic congestion has prompted decision-makers to look for

started commercial operations in December 2004, connecting Beijing southern area

Figure 2. Beijing Southern Axis BRT Line 1.

3.1. Questionnaire design

3.2. Sampling method

3.2.2. Survey location

3.2.3. Selection of respondents

examined to explore BRT’s potential capability to increase residential property

4.1. Demographic profile of respondents (N 525)

4.1.2. Age group

4.1.3. Education level

All BRT users Captive users Choice users

Gender Male 284 54.1 258 56.1 26 40.0

Transportation Planning and Technology

4.1.5. Personal monthly income

4.1.6. Modal shift

Main motivation to use BRT

Less environmental impact 4

BRT is more convenient 34

Figure 4. Main motivation for choice users to use BRT (N 65).

4.2. Travel-related characteristics of BRT users

4.2.1. The trip purpose of respondents

Didn’t make Others, 1.0%

4.2.3. Transport mode normally used to access a BRT station

4.2.4. Frequency of travel by BRT

4.2.5. Evaluation of the BRT service

Figure 9. Satisfaction rate to the BRT service (N525).

An independent-samples t-test was conducted to examine whether there is a

Attributes Choice users (N65) Captive users (N 460) p-Values

Speed 4.25 4.35 0.307

4.2.6. Suggestions for improvement

from the bad weather.

4.3. Respondents’ perception of living near BRT stations

4.3.1. Date when residents moved to be near the BRT corridor

Demographics Travel behaviour Satisfaction to use BRT

52.7% male 52.2% work-related Highly satisfied with BRT service

Figure 10. Timeline of implementing Beijing Southern Axis BRT Line 1.

attractive. A large majority of respondents (46.1%) moved to a place near BRT

4.3.2. Distance from respondents’ houses to their nearest station

Figure 11. Residential relocation time of respondents (N 228).

Source: this study.

4.3.3. Preference to move nearer a BRT station

Figure 13. Preference for relocation nearer a BRT station (N 297).

5. Discussion and conclusion

View publication stats

4.1. Demographic profile of respondents (N 525)

Figure 4. Main motivation for choice users to use BRT (N 65).

Figure 9. Satisfaction rate to the BRT service (N525).

Attributes Choice users (N65) Captive users (N 460) p-Values

Figure 11. Residential relocation time of respondents (N 228).

Figure 13. Preference for relocation nearer a BRT station (N 297).