You are on page 1of 29

Urban PaPer SerieS 2012

PrOViDinG TraVeLer inFOrMaTiOn SerViCeS


WHaT iS THe aPPrOPriaTe PUbLiC SeCTOr rOLe?
CarOL KUeSTer

2012 The German Marshall Fund of the United States. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without permission in writing from the German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMF). Please direct inquiries to: The German Marshall Fund of the United States 1744 R Street, NW Washington, DC 20009 T 1 202 683 2650 F 1 202 265 1662 E info@gmfus.org This publication can be downloaded for free at http://www.gmfus.org/publications/index.cfm. Limited print copies are also available. To request a copy, send an e-mail to info@gmfus.org. GMF Paper Series The GMF Paper Series presents research on a variety of transatlantic topics by staff, fellows, and partners of the German Marshall Fund of the United States. The views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of GMF. Comments from readers are welcome; reply to the mailing address above or by e-mail to info@gmfus.org. about GMF The German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMF) is a non-partisan American public policy and grantmaking institution dedicated to promoting better understanding and cooperation between North America and Europe on transatlantic and global issues. GMF does this by supporting individuals and institutions working in the transatlantic sphere, by convening leaders and members of the policy and business communities, by contributing research and analysis on transatlantic topics, and by providing exchange opportunities to foster renewed commitment to the transatlantic relationship. In addition, GMF supports a number of initiatives to strengthen democracies. Founded in 1972 through a gift from Germany as a permanent memorial to Marshall Plan assistance, GMF maintains a strong presence on both sides of the Atlantic. In addition to its headquarters in Washington, DC, GMF has seven offices in Europe: Berlin, Paris, Brussels, Belgrade, Ankara, Bucharest, and Warsaw. GMF also has smaller representations in Bratislava, Turin, and Stockholm. On the cover: Westbound commute from Oakland across the cantilevered portion of the San Francisco Bay Bridge. Hanson Quan

Providing Traveler Information Services


What is the Appropriate Public Sector Role?
Urban Policy Paper Series May 2012

Carol Kuester1

Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Traveler Information in the EU, Austria, the U.K. and London, and Germany . . . . . . . 5 Key Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Annex A: List of Interviewees. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Annex B: Overview of Typical U.S. Data Dissemination and Collection Approaches . . 20 Annex C: Providing Public Traveler Information Services with Decreasing Funding: U.S. Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Carol Kuester is the principal program coordinator at the Metropolitan Transportation Commission in the San Francisco Bay Area. She completed the research that informed this paper in spring 2011 as an Urban and Regional Policy Fellow with the German Marshall Fund of the United States.

Executive Summary

n the last decade, metropolitan areas in the United States and in Europe have established web and telephone-based traveler information systems to consolidate data about transportation options and conditions for easy access by the public. Providing such information is fundamental to transportation system management, an approach that explicitly recognizes the impossibility of continuing to expand transportation infrastructure and instead focuses on maximizing the use of existing services and facilities. In the United States, where traveler information services are typically provided at the state or regional level, several key trends have converged to raise questions about the appropriate role of the public sector in providing information services: The economic downturn and resultant resource scarcity are forcing policymakers to re-examine expenditures. Consumer expectations for access to and quality of transportation information are increasing due to On-going improvements in geo-location, mapping, and search technologies on mobile devices, Increased options for accessing information via mobile devices, texting, social networking, and in-vehicle navigation devices, and A philosophy that data generated by the public sector should be freely shared and easily accessible. Private sector information providers (particularly Google) are expanding their transportation information services. In light of these trends, providers of public sector traveler information services in the United States

are increasingly called upon to define and defend their role in providing traveler information services. This research examines how European policymakers, particularly in the United Kingdom, Austria, and Germany, are adapting their traveler information systems to these trends. What are the key challenges in delivering traveler information in Europe and what initiatives, if any, are in place to help overcome these challenges? How are public policymakers defining their role in providing services and/or working with the private sector to harness privately funded initiatives? Finally, how does the European experience inform the perspective of local and regional traveler information providers in the United States, particularly in the San Francisco Bay Area? Based on interviews with more than three dozen transportation planners, policymakers, consultants, and private-sector automobile and software providers from London, Austria, Nrnberg, Munich, and Berlin, this research finds that European policymakers are committed to funding high-quality, multimodal travel options and related traveler information services, both as a fundamental approach to managing congestion and incidents and as part of their mission to encourage use of public transportation. Despite the fact that European transportation program managers are, like their U.S. counterparts, eager to implement cost-cutting or revenue-generating strategies while delivering traveler information, efforts to do so have been relatively fruitless. European traveler information deployers are more skeptical than many of their U.S. counterparts of relying on Google or other private sector firms to provide phone, web, and mobile services. European program managers believe providing accurate, reliable information is an important component of delivering transportation and mobility services.

Providing Traveler Information Services

At some point in the future, traveler information will be ubiquitous, highly accurate, and free of charge. Until that time, and to ensure that we are helping to enable that future, the public sector should view information services as an inherent part of the transportation infrastructure and use the authority of government to ensure that all people who travel in a city or region especially those that seek alternatives to single-occupant vehicle trips have convenient, reliable access to accurate information about their trip options.

The German Marshall Fund of the United States

1
T

Background

he San Francisco Bay Area produces greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions at three times the world average, and the single largest source of these emissions some 40 percent comes from transportation. The California Global Warming Solutions Act (Assembly Bill 32), signed in 2006, mandates a reduction in GHG emissions from all sources to 1990 levels by the year 2020. Reducing emissions to this level means cutting approximately 30 percent from business-as-usual emissions projected by 2020, or about 15 percent from todays levels. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) is the planning, financing, and coordinating agency directing transportation investments on behalf of the 7 million residents in the San Francisco Bay Area. MTC is the regions Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) responsible for developing a long-range transportation and land use plan that will reduce per-capita carbon dioxide emissions under Californias 2008 Senate Bill 375. A pioneer in new transportation technologies, MTC is increasingly relying on a number of high-tech programs (known as Intelligent Transportation Systems, or ITS) to ease commutes, increase efficient use of the transportation network, and meet emissions reductions goals. A prime example is the 511 Traveler Information System, providing realtime traffic conditions via the phone, a companion Web site at 511.org, and on mobile devices. The 511 system consolidates static and real-time traffic, transit, ridesharing, and bicycling data, thus providing sophisticated trip planning tools that are inclusive of alternatives to driving. In the United States, the Bay Area 511 traveler information program is unparalleled. In recent years, several factors have raised consumers expectations for traveler information: increased options for accessing information (via texting, mobile websites, social network sites),

the ever-increasing number of mobile applications and geo-location services (often provided by the private sector, free of charge, or for a nominal fee), and the philosophy that data, particularly data generated in the public sector, should be freely shared and easily accessible. Though business models and offerings vary somewhat, these changes are occurring internationally. U.S. planners and technology managers can benefit from and take advantage of lessons learned in Europe. European transportation planners generally have more transportation funding, more years of experience implementing ITS technologies, and populations that are more open to alternatives to the single occupant vehicle. Because of higher fuel prices, for example, although Germany and the USA have among the highest motorization rates in the worldGermans make a four times higher share of trips by foot, bike, and public transport and drive for a 25 percent lower share of trips as Americans.1 The United Kingdom is an international leader in traveler information services, with both a nationwide journey planner (Transport Direct) and sophisticated, multimodal traveler information tools for the City of London (relying on some of the same technology vendors as the Bay Area 511 program.) Brussels is home to the European Union where international directives regarding intelligent transportation systems are developed. Germany has long offered excellent regionally integrated transit information and Bavaria has experimented with a public/private partnership model to support provision of traveler information. Despite the cultural, built environment, and policy differences between the United States and Europe,
1

Buehler, Ralph, 2011. Determinants of Mode Choice: A Comparison of Germany and the USA, Transport Geography, Vol. 19, pp. 644-657.

Providing Traveler Information Services

policymakers providing traveler information face similar challenges. On both continents, traveler information providers are concerned with costs and opportunities related to data collection and data dissemination. Data collection is the coordination and fusion of 1) data collected on roadways (i.e. speed, travel time, construction and incident information), 2) data collected from transit operators (i.e. route, schedule, and fare information, and real-time arrival/departure status), and 3) other available data related to bicycle routes, ridesharing options, parking options, etc. These data inputs must be verified for accuracy, stored, and combined with other data and/or maps before being distributed for end-user consumption. Data dissemination refers to the distribution of traveler information data via television, radio, telephone systems, websites, texting, mobile applications, changeable message signs, and other means. Both functions are crucial to providing end-users with reliable, accurate, and accessible information. This work is based on more than three dozen interviews with British, Austrian, German, and European Union transportation policymakers about the changing business and policy environment for traveler information services. Research and interviews resulted in several key findings about the status of traveler information services in Europe and provided lessons for U.S. policymakers.

The German Marshall Fund of the United States

2
T

Traveler Information in the EU, Austria, the U.K. and London, and Germany
The European Commission is to adopt specifications for one or more priority actions by Feb. 27, 2013. Member states are to take necessary measures to ensure that specifications are applied to ITS services when deployed. The directive also called for establishment of a European ITS Advisory Group to advise the Commission on business and technical aspects of the deployment and use of ITS in the Union.4 Another indication of the level of interest in European-wide traveler information tools is the challenge to industry issued by European Commission Vice President Siim Kallas at the June 2011 ITS Congress in Lyon. He asked for tools and solutions to overcome barriers in Europe-wide multi-modal trip planning. Kallas noted that there are more than 100 journey planners in Europe, but none that supports trip planning and ticket booking regardless of number of countries or modes. Submissions were due in early September 2011 and the winner will be invited to Brussels for discussions and to the ITS World Congress in October 2012 in Vienna. While European policy solutions are in development and directives are being adopted by member states, federal and local traveler information providers are simultaneously developing locally customized traveler information solutions. Several such initiatives are described below. Traveler Information in Austria Austria has a strong interest in supporting implementation of ITS strategies nationally and across the EU. Transportation policymakers in Austria face special challenges because the land-locked country is crucial to north/south European car and truck travel. Policymakers are therefore particularly interested in implementation of consistent ITS standards throughout Europe to support multimodal and multi-national traveler information sharing. AustriaTech, a wholly owned subsidiary
4

Traveler Information in the European Union he European Parliament adopted an ITS Directive on July 7, 2010 to establish a framework in support of the coordinated and coherent deployment and use of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) within the Union, particularly across the borders between Member States.2 The goal of the directive is to accelerate the deployment of these innovative transport technologies across Europe[and] to establish interoperable and seamless ITS services while leaving Member States the freedom to decide which systems to invest in.3 The directive identified six priority actions, all of which directly related to or rely on traveler information systems. The six priority actions are: Provision of EU-wide multi-modal travel information services, Provision of EU-wide real-time traffic information services, Data and procedures for provision of road safety and related minimum universal traffic information free of charge to users, Harmonized provision for an interoperable EUwide eCall (an emergency call system), Provision of information services for safe and secure parking places for trucks and commercial vehicles, and Provision of reservation services for safe and secure parking places for trucks and commercial vehicles.
2

While European policy solutions are in development and directives are being adopted by member states, federal and local traveler information providers are simultaneously developing locally customized traveler information solutions.

Directive 2010/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of July 7, 2010 on the framework for the deployment of Intelligent Transport Systems in the field of road transport and for interfaces with other modes of transport, Official Journal of the European Union, L 207/1, August 6, 2010. European Commission Mobility and Transport website, http:// ec.europa.eu/transport/its/road/action_plan/call_application_eiag_en.htm

ibid

Providing Traveler Information Services

The public sector could, in theory, get out of the business of providing end-user information services.

of the Austrian Federal Department of Transportation, is leading an innovative EU pilot project called In-Time Intelligent and Efficient Travel Management for European Cities. The project began in April 2009, includes 22 partners, and has a planned duration of three years. The project aims to implement a pan-Europe multi-modal Real-Time Travel Information System through the implementation of a standardized interface for data exchange between operators and service providers.5 The basic In-Time concept is that local infrastructure operators will provide real-time data based on agreed-upon quality standards. A regional data/service server (RDSS), which took a year to develop and was created by an Italian company called Softeco, will translate data sets into a standard format and provide them to information service providers (ISPs.) The ISPs will then create services, such as mobile phone applications and web-based travel planning tools, based on the data and provide them to end-users. The RDSS will also enable public sector transportation providers to obtain information for system management. To date the service is available in six European cities: Brno (Czech Republic), Bucharest, Florence, Munich, Oslo, and Vienna. The service in Vienna now has 6,000 subscribers (without any advertising promotion.) AustriaTechs project manager Martin Boehm argues that if the In-Time model is successful, the public sector could, in theory, get out of the business of providing end-user information services, such as the A nach B multimodal trip planner for Vienna (www.anachb.at/) and 511 phone and web services in the United States, since private sector ISPs would do so. The cost to operate the RDSS could be shared by several agencies and would presumably be significantly less than operating web and phone dissemination services. This approach
Martin Boehm presentation: In-Time: Intelligent and Efficient Travel Management for European Cities, 2nd Annual Review Meeting, 19th of May 2011, Bucharest.
5

would enable the public sector to focus on the task of data collection and enable the private sector to create dissemination tools with robust data sets. Traveler Information in the United Kingdom and London In the United Kingdom, the U.K. Department for Transport, the Welsh Assembly Government, and the Scottish Government fund a national journey planner called Transport Direct. Transport Direct is operated by a consortium, led by a private contractor, who works with public and private travel operators and local/national government to obtain travel data. Transport Direct has been operating since 2003 and is the only website that offers information for door-to-door travel for both public transport and car journeys around Britain. The website tools aim to provide comprehensive, easy-to-use travel information to help [travelers] plan [their] journeys effectively and efficiently.6 Nick Illsley, Chief Executive of Transport Direct, notes that Transport Direct was introduced to correct a market failure.7 Politically, a national multi-modal trip planner was identified as a need that the private sector would not meet and that the public sector must therefore provide. Because most of the required data elements were pre-existing locally, the main assignment for Transport Direct was to pull data from local systems to populate the national journey planner. The result was a federated structure that requires coordination, but is very flexible and scalable. An explicit goal of Transport Direct was to ask not how users plan to travel, but instead why they are traveling and then to recommend services to meet their needs. At the outset, the programs focus was to develop a shiny front end tool (i.e. a modern, sophisticated web user interface), but Illsley reports that his staff s focus is increasingly on managing the back-end (i.e. collec6 7

www.transportdirect.info, About Us.

Interview with Nick Illsley, Chief Executive, Transport Direct, London, July 13, 2011.

The German Marshall Fund of the United States

tion, fusion, and management of data), Transport Direct staff aim to maximize efficiency by creating data sets once and using them or making them available for use by others many times. Transport for London (TfL), reporting to the mayor of London and a Board appointed by the mayor, implements transport strategy and manages transport services across London. Transportation management challenges in London are significant: the city has a population of 7 million and TfL provides 24 million bus, Underground, tram, ferry, bicycle, and other trips daily. By 2025, Londons population is expected to increase by 1 million, producing an extra 4 million trips a day. In that same timeframe, the mayor of London has committed to reducing CO2 emissions by 60 percent, as measured against 1990 levels. Since transportation is responsible for 22 percent of Londons emissions, TfL will need to support growth in travel while reducing emissions from travel. Therefore, TfL aggressively discourages single occupant vehicle travel (i.e. through congestion pricing and parking charges) and promotes public transportation, bicycling, and walking. Since 2000, TfLs efforts have resulted in a 60 percent increase in bus ridership, the highest Underground ridership ever, and a 90 percent increase in cycling. In addition to changing the way people travel, TfL also encourages people to operate their vehicles more efficiently, invests in lower carbon fuels and technology, and manages its business activities with an eye to emissions reduction.8 Examples of TfLs multifaceted approach to emissions reduction include: In November 2011 Londons mayor announced that TfL will be part of a trial of wireless change points for electric vehicles. TfL is further expanding transit capacity through projects such as the crossrail project (linking Heathrow Airport, the West End, the City of London and
8

Canary Wharf), which is currently the largest construction project in Europe. London will host the Summer Olympics in 2012 and has committed to maximizing public transportation options and giving commuters the information they need to plan their trips in advance of and during the Games. Transport for London staff recognize the important role of traveler information services in managing their congested city environment and traveler demands. In 2007, TfL relaunched their main website (www.tfl.gov.uk.) with the goal of making the site simple and accessible for all users. The site now receives 170 million web visits annually and serves up to 1.7 billion page views each year. Most users are satisfied: 90 percent consider the website excellent, very good, or above average. In addition to the website (which includes a journey planner), TfL provides a mobile website, users alert services, and information via text messaging. The site has an explicit emergency role and was recently heralded as a good example of providing public sector responsiveness during winter snowstorms. In general, TfL staff believe that a) consumers are eager to access traveler information through multiple channels and that b) providing information to consumers is crucial to the success of TfL strategies, such as construction and upgrade projects that disrupt regular service. TfL staff have experimented with offering personalized tools such as a custom journey planner and SMS alerts for Underground construction events. But despite marketing, personalized tools have not been used as much as anticipated, perhaps because information is already widely available in many formats and registration processes are perceived as onerous. Transport for London staff report that while they believe they are meeting customers information needs, there are gaps in access to information,

Transport for London, Climate Change Factsheet July 2009.

Providing Traveler Information Services

especially when en-route.9 They are continuing to pursue cutting-edge technology options for filling gaps and believe digital channels, such as mobile apps, are key. Giles Bailey, Head of Group Marketing Strategy and Integration, points out that:

While it is possible to combine large amounts of multi-modal information, the key is to confirm the utility of the data and to ensure that data is presented in a way that is desirable to users.

Digital channels meet many of the gaps by: Being available at the time and place customers need information, Making it easy to find relevant information, and Providing intuitive information.10 Traveler Information in Germany Germany does not have a single, national, multimodal journey planner comparable to the U.K.s Transport Direct. ITS projects and traveler information are delivered at the state and regional level by urban planning or road authorities (through Traffic Management Centers, or Verkehrsmanagementzentrale) and transit operators (through transit coordinating federations, or Verkehrsverbnde). Two innovative, publicly operated examples of multimodal traveler information services are the Verkehrsmanagementzentrale in Berlin (a project of the Senate Administration for Urban Development) and Bavarias Bayerninfo project (sponsored by the Board of Building and Public Works within the Bavarian Ministry of the Interior.) They provide both staffed transportation management centers to support traffic and incident management, and web-based information services for travelers. In both regions, public agencies have contracted with private firms for these services with the aim of reducing operating costs. The Bavarian State began offering traveler information in the early 1990s when officials acknowledged that serving the public with accurate pre-trip and
9

en-route information could lead to more efficient traffic management, especially given that there was no further ability to expand traffic infrastructure. Since 2009, the Bavarian Ministry of the Interior has operated the Bayerninfo project through a public-private partnership with a consortium of partners led by Siemens (called Verkehrsinformationsagentur Bayern or VIB.) The user-oriented front-end of Bayerninfo (the website at www. bayerninfo.de) is only one part of the system. The project included development of a powerful backend system with structured and efficient storage mechanisms for all types of traffic-related information, including bicycling information. Data is organized so it can to be used for end-user distribution and also for internal purposes of the road administration. The Bayerninfo system is well-used: there are roughly 1 million page views each month and about 300,000 unique users each month, and usage is growing. Usage strongly depends on traffic and weather conditions and on seasonal events, such as Oktoberfest or the beginning of the summer holiday season. Typical users are workers (e.g. to confirm their daily commute route status), tourists, cyclists, and public transit riders. Like providers of traveler information worldwide, planners responsible for delivery of Bayerninfo are observing and responding to changing trends. Bayerninfo project managers11 note that while it is possible to combine large amounts of multi-modal information, the key is to confirm the utility of the data and to ensure that data is presented in a way that is desirable to users. Increasingly, Bayerninfo is experimenting with providing quick overviews, then offering more details only to users who want them. Information about public transportation services is integrated into the progressive traveler information
11

Interview with Giles Bailey, Head of Group Marketing Strategy and Integration, Transport for London, July 12, 2011.

10

Transport for London Group marketing and communications, Digital Strategy 2011-14, V 1.0 Summary, June 2011.

Interview with Peter Pollesch and Christoph Maget, Oberste Baubehoerde Bayern, Staatsministerium des Inneren (Bavarian Ministry of the Interior), Responsible for Verkehrsinformation Bayern project, July 21, 2011.

The German Marshall Fund of the United States

system in Berlin and Bavaria, but is the primary responsibility of regional transit coordinating authorities (Verkehrsverbnde.) These organizations are in some respects similar to metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) in the United States in that both have regional public transportation planning and funding responsibilities. But the Verkehrsverbnde are much more powerful. They plan public transportation services, integrate timetables and fares, distribute operating subsidies, and ensure a seamless public transportation system.12 These coordinating authorities ensure that problems that commonly plague regional transit service such as fare penalties for transferring, conflicting timetables, and interagency rivalries are eliminated.13 Verkehrsverbnde can be organized in two ways: 1) as a Verkehrsunternehmenverbund, or cooperation among public transit operating agencies, or 2) as an Aufgabentrgerverbund, an organization established by the public agencies that fund transit service. These organizations are often incorporated as private limited liability companies (GmbH, or Gesellschaft mit beschrnkter Haftung), which must have a minimum of two partners and may be, but do not have to be, owned by a public company. The Mnchener Verkehrsverbund (MVV), responsible for transit coordination in the Munich region (which includes eight counties and 1.4 million people), offers one of the oldest and most sophisticated public transit information websites in the Europe (www.mvv-muenchen.de/) and provides an example of German transit coordinating authorities serious commitment to traveler information services. The MVVs goal is to provide a neutral, trusted source of information for transit riders. The
Buehler, Ralph, Promoting Public Transportation: Comparison of Passengers and Policies in Germany and the United States, Transportation Research Record: Jounral of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2110, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington DC, 2009, pp. 60-68. 13 Cervero, Robert, The Transit Metropolis, Island Press, October 1, 1998.
12

MVV transit trip planner generates 15 million trip itineraries a month. To support web-based information services, MVV employs about a dozen people to work on transit data collection and ensuring data accuracy for the 40 transit agencies in the region.

Providing Traveler Information Services

3
E
European traveler information providers, like their U.S. counterparts, are eager to improve efficiency and cut costs.

Key Findings

uropean traveler information service providers believe that providing traveler information services is an important public sector priority, as demonstrated by the case studies described above. Four other key findings can be drawn from comparing European approaches to providing traveler information to approaches in the United States. Finding #1: European traveler information providers, like their U.S. counterparts, are eager to improve efficiency and cut costs. Efforts to do so have had mixed results. Despite experimentation with contracting mechanisms and provision of data to third parties, European deployers continue to struggle with bearing the cost of traveler information services and determining the optimal deployment framework. Cost reduction strategies for delivering traveler information in Europe include 1) streamlining internal operations, 2) allowing advertising on websites, 3) providing data feeds to encourage application development, 4) using social media, and 5) using innovative contracting strategies to build public/ private partnerships and take advantage of private sector innovation. Transport for London is embracing several of the above-listed strategies. Staff are consolidating internal and client-facing sites a significant task, given that the agency supports about 150 websites in total. One department now leads strategy for all digital tools, customer sites, and intranets. TfL has developed a web design toolkit to ensure consistent user experience across sites built by disparate developers.14 Transport for London also allows advertising on websites through two approaches: a partnership approach (i.e. sponsorship of the Journey Planner), and hosting of ads provided through Google ad
14

exchange. It is as yet unclear which approach is more lucrative. TfL staff report that there has been no negative feedback from the public and that, in fact, with the overall downturn in the economy and corresponding need for public sector cutbacks, there was a perception that TfL has untapped assets.15 The process of allowing advertising on the websites was simplified by preexisting advertising policies. Transport Direct and the Mnchener Verkehrsverbund also allow advertising on their websites. Transport for London is also leading the way in engaging with third party developers to achieve business objectives, cut costs, and increase efficiency. TfL pushes out dozens of data feeds free of charge and actively encourages developers to use the feeds.16 TfL now has a policy of not creating its own apps, but instead maintaining robust application programming interfaces (APIs) so that developers can create reliable applications. Data sets are continuously expanded to include new information, such as Oyster (the single smart card fare payment system) ticket locations, trip information gleaned from Oyster transactions, and Barclays Cycle Hire usage statistics. This strategy has been successful. Hundreds of applications are available to end users thanks to the efforts of private developers, and at no cost to TfL. The Bay Area Rapid Transit District in the San Francisco region has employed a similar strategy and has likewise had success stimulating development of applications. Transport for London staff are now creating an endorsement program for apps, and will screen apps so that those that meet minimum qualifications will be allowed into

15

Interviews with Transport for London staff Phil Young, Client Services Manager, Group New Media and Giles Bailey, Head of Group Marketing Strategy and Integration, July 12, 2011.

Interviews with Phil Young, Client Services Manager, Group New Media, Transport for London, and Giles Bailey, Head of Group Marketing Strategy and Integration, Transport for London, July 12, 2011. See Transport for London Developers Area: http://www.tfl. gov.uk/businessandpartners/syndication/default.aspx

16

10

The German Marshall Fund of the United States

a walled garden highlighting recommended websites and applications.17 Though third-party apps provide significant new access to TfL data, there is no plan for TfL to relinquish its own data dissemination roles and rely entirely on private sector or third party data dissemination. Working to encourage development of applications powered by TfL data does not generate revenue for TfL, but creates new services for free, relieving TfL staff of the need to create highly specialized apps or to build applications for all end-user platforms. Since use of the TfL website is not declining, TfL planners believe that apps are helping provide entirely new market segments with traveler information. For app developers, branding their apps with TfL symbols (i.e. the famous Underground roundel, one of the most readily recognized symbols in the world, according to TfLs Giles Baily) or stating that their apps are powered by TfL data has enormous value. TfL therefore stringently controls branding of independent apps and aggressively pursue those who do not comply.18 At a conference for app developers convened by 511 staff in the San Francisco region, developers reacted very positively to this kind of approach by a public agency to sharing data, and reiterated that the ability to say apps were powered by 511 data and/ or be featured on the 511 website would be at least as valuable as financial compensation.19 Another low-cost option for providing information to end-users is to take advantage of social media platforms, such as Facebook and Twitter. Information providers in the U.K. and Germany are not yet eagerly embracing these options, but Transport for London plans to, beginning early in 2013. They also intend to encourage customers to comment
17

on content published, and use feedback to further improve information services. Program managers in Europe were very interested and encouraged to hear about positive experiences in the San Francisco region disseminating traffic and transit incident information on Twitter and posting updates about the 511 program on Facebook. In contrast to some of Transport for Londons cost-cutting successes, efforts to find innovative financing models for traveler information in Germany have met with greater challenges. A key objective of the sophisticated Bayerninfo service in Bavaria (described above) was to harness private sector initiative while retaining a strong public sector role in traveler information delivery. The Bavarian Baubehrde (Ministry of Public Works) experimented with an innovative public/private contracting strategy to deliver Bayerninfo. Planners issued a Request for Proposals for a private sector partner who would provide basic services under contract but also enhance data and create services that they could then sell at a profit. Two teams of contractors responded, and the consortium led by Siemens was awarded the contract. The contract is now in the sixth year of a ten-year term, and ministry planners and the Siemens project lead agree that the business model is not working as hoped. Planners report that the most significant challenges are related to the complexities of managing multiple data sources, which requires coordination with cities, public transport providers, traffic data providers, and others. Developing and maintaining a common basemap for data display is also challenging. And, despite the difficulty of these tasks, end users expect to receive traveler information free of charge, so there is no business model for selling traveler information. Planners report there is no question that the basic services offered by Bayerninfo will continue, but it is not clear what contractual model will be used to support it. Further dissemination enhancements are not

TfL planners believe that apps are helping provide entirely new market segments with traveler information. For app developers, branding their apps with TfL symbols or stating that their apps are powered by TfL data has enormous value.

Digital Strategy 2011-14, TfL Group Marketing & Communications, v1.0 Summary, June 2011, Transport for London. Use our data, but dont pretend to be us: http://www.tfl.gov. uk/businessandpartners/syndication/17102.aspx. Notes from MTC Mobile Technology Workshop, August 30, 2011.

18

19

Providing Traveler Information Services

11

European public sector deployers are open to cooperating with the private sector, but they do not believe that they can rely fully on the private sector to provide sufficiently high-quality, comprehensive service.

anticipated. Planners are exploring how to build open systems, with open interfaces, while at the same time ensuring that provision of traveler information is not dominated by commercial interests. The Bavarian States strategy is to provide a basic set of public transport information, even if there are private services available as well. In Berlin, the experience of trying to cost-effectively provide traveler information services has been similar. In the early 1990s, German ITS planners believed that robust, accurate traffic data could be sold at a profit to developers. This thinking shaped the operating contract that spanned from 2000 to 2010, which give the contractor significant freedom to develop a system that would enable them to earn a profit. No market for traffic or traveler information materialized, however. The new contract that began in 2010 was more tightly specified, based on the first decade of experience. Although the contractor operating the Verkehrsmanagementzentrale in Berlin believes there is significant revenue potential advertising on street signs, public sector authorities will not allow this, citing legal restrictions and concerns about driver distraction. Efforts to decrease the cost of providing traveler information services have included 1) streamlining internal operations, 2) allowing advertising on websites, 3) providing data feeds to encourage application development, 4) using social media, and 5) using innovative contracting strategies to build public/private partnerships and take advantage of private sector innovation. While these efforts show some potential to defray costs on the margins, none provides a model for significantly reducing the cost of providing traveler information in the United States. Finding #2: European public sector deployers are open to cooperating with the private sector, but they do not believe that they can rely fully on the private sector to provide sufficiently high-

quality, comprehensive service. European public transit agencies are particularly ambivalent about providing data to Google. Providers of traveler information are monitoring with great interest Googles increasing role in providing traveler information. Google offers driving speeds and driving times, public transportation information, and real-time public transportation information. Because Google has such a tremendous base of users who rely on their maps, millions of Google users can easily access traveler information on the site as well. If use of Googles traveler information becomes ubiquitous, use of other publicly and privately provided services could become increasingly irrelevant. Google has defined a common format for transfer of public transit schedules (i.e. including data fields for routes, schedules, stops, etc.) and associated geographic data called GTFS (originally called the Google Transit Feed Specification, now referred to as the General Transit Feed Specification). Though this standard is gaining popularity in the United States, neither Transport for London, Transport Direct, or any of the data providers in Germany are providing their data in GTFS format. Nick Illsley of Transport Direct states that while Google is powerful, the search engine cannot afford to provide a meaningful level of local detail within travel information. For example, in the San Francisco Bay Area, Google provides data for just a handful of the largest transit providers (i.e. BART, San Francisco MUNI, Alameda-Contra Costa Transit, Central Contra Costa Transportation Authority) although there are more than two dozen operators in the region. Furthermore, he does not believe they can efficiently provide multi-modal trip planning because the processing time required would be prohibitive. Illsley and others also note that the GTFS format is too simplistic data fields to provide specifics about transfer options or accessible services are not available. Further, they say

12

The German Marshall Fund of the United States

that while Google might inspire new ideas about provision of traveler information, the availability of Google does not relieve government of the necessity of providing traveler information. This position is not shared by many U.S. transit agencies, particularly those that cannot afford to provide highly customized end-user services. On both sides of the Atlantic, many providers of transportation information services believe that Google is best viewed as a complementary, additional resource, but not a replacement for publicly funded services. Nick Illsley of Transport Direct supports this view arguing that Google will only provide basic information, and the public sector is left to provide the expensive, boring, high-quality bits. 20 Nevertheless, the Google service continues to improve and, depending on Googles business priorities, it may eventually be comprehensive and detailed enough to replace costly publicly provided systems. In Germany, the question of whether to provide public transportation data to Google is very controversial. The Verband Deutsche Verkehrsunternehmen (the national association of public transportation providers) is coordinating discussion on the topic. While transit operators are eager to get marketing exposure through Google, their top priority is ensuring that accurate data is provided to users and they remain unconvinced that Google will meet their high standards. Mnchener Verkehrsverbund (MVV) planners echo planners in the U.K. who state that the Google-defined GTFS format has major limitations, and they cite instances where Google has had public transit agency data but has been unable to accurately provide it on their site. At the moment, MVV does not provide raw data to Google, and only provides routing data with routes generated from their internal trip planner, rather than relying on Googles. While citizens may be asking for data to be provided via the Google interface, German
20

and Austrian transportation planners currently take the position that providing no data is preferable to allowing bad or inadequate data on Google. Austrian transit authorities reportedly stopped providing data to Google after receiving complaints from the public about bad quality. Though the data was provided by Google, the public authorities were ultimately seen as responsible for the quality of the data. Finding #3: Organized, coordinated, and powerful transportation agencies greatly simplify delivery of traveler information. Organizations like Transport for London, German transit federations, and the Austrian Federal Ministry of Transport do not question the need to provide traveler information as a crucial element in managing transportation systems. These organizations have a fundamental commitment to providing traveler information and can therefore focus on how to most effectively provide information, not whether or not to do so. These organizations take seriously their role in influencing travel behavior. Therefore, they are committed not only to supporting data collection and dissemination through their own outreach and websites, but also to coordinating, evaluating, and endorsing or working to discontinue information services provided by third parties. European transportation agencies see this role as crucial to ensuring that the public will benefit from accurate, reliable information and not be harmed or confused by inaccurate information. They emphasize that public agencies are ultimately responsibleboth legally and in the eyes of the public for managing the transportation network. They would not consider contracting for the kinds of no-cost traveler information systems that some regions in the United States are now procuring. Instead, they would counsel program managers in the United States to advocate for a public sector role in traveler information for the foreseeable future, despite the entry of private

Organized, coordinated, and powerful transportation agencies greatly simplify delivery of traveler information.

Interview with Nick Illsley, Chief Executive, Transport Direct, July 13, 2011.

Providing Traveler Information Services

13

sector companies into the marketplace. But while this perspective is admirable, it is not clear whether it is tenable in the current U.S. institutional and funding environment given ever-increasing pressure on public sector budgets.

years, and may reinvigorate the organization, but in general, coordination with peer agencies is the responsibility of individual deployers and too often a task that lacks resources. Traveler information providers in the United States could benefit from greater information exchange with peer agencies nationally and internationally to share lessons learned regarding opportunities offered by new technologies such as cloud computing, open source software, and crowdsourced data and mapping tools. They share an interest in monitoring connected vehicle initiatives, which could soon radically reshape technological options for collecting and disseminating traveler information data. In addition, they could also benefit from more aggressively pooling their negotiating power as their counterparts in Germany and Austria have. Finding #4: Perhaps because European traveler information providers are not as focused as their U.S. counterparts on cost-cutting and on lobbying for an on-going public sector role in providing traveler information, they are more visionary and forward-looking. From local players in London or the region of Nrnberg to the EU level, transportation planners are working on concepts and projects to integrate fare payment with traveler information. This issue is also very relevant in the San Francisco Bay Area and other regions of the United States that have implemented smart card fare payment systems. Anticipating customer demand, developers have begun mocking up integrated traveler information and fare payment applications for smart phones. One such developer recently approached San Francisco MUNI (one of more than two dozen transit agencies in the Bay Area, and the provider of the greatest number of trips per day) with a proposed trip planning and fare payment app. Because the app as designed would pull data from the Clipper regional fare payment program (operated by MTC)

Perhaps because European traveler information providers are not as focused as their U.S. counterparts on cost-cutting and on lobbying for an on-going public sector role in providing traveler information, they are more visionary and forward-looking.

European deployers of traveler information also benefit from stronger organizational coordination that eases data collection and dissemination challenges and strengthens the public sectors ability to negotiate with the private sector. In the San Francisco Bay Area, regional 511 program managers do not own or operate the road network or the public transportation systems. Coordination with the State Department of Transportation, more than two dozen transit agencies, and local cities and counties to obtain data and to ensure that data is timely and accurate requires significant resources. In the United Kingdom, Transport Direct was implemented from the top down, as a national imperative. Transport for London staff report directly to the mayor, and transportation management for the City of London is acknowledged as crucial to the economic vitality and overall functioning of the city. In Germany, the regional transit federations were created to ensure coordination in transit service delivery. Currently, the Association of German Transport Companies (VDV) is coordinating inter-agency discussions and negotiating with Google on behalf of German transit operators, and Austrian transit providers (coordinated through the IGV or Interessen Gemeinschaft der sterrichischen Verkehrsverbnde) have agreed not to provide data to Google. Neither the American Public Transportation Association nor the Intelligent Transportation Society of America plays a similarly strong, active role in the United States. Both are membership organizations whose members are both public sector agencies and private sector vendors. The Federal Highway Administration supported a national 511 deployment coalition for several

14

The German Marshall Fund of the United States

MUNI staff included MTC staff in discussions. To stay in step with end-user expectations, planners in both agencies must now work to quickly develop principles and processes for developing and offering apps with card balance checking or even fare payment functionality.

Providing Traveler Information Services

15

4
E
Private sector internet service and in-vehicle navigation device providers are increasingly providing traveler information, prompting questions about the appropriate public sector role in the traveler information business.

Conclusion

ffectively moving people from singleoccupant vehicles to public transit and other modes (e.g. walking, bicycling, ridesharing) requires more than just accurate, reliable information services. Basic changes in U.S. public transportation policy and funding are required to move travelers out of automobiles. Researcher Ralph Buehler compared transit ridership in Germany and the United States and found that Germans used public transportation for at least five times as many trips as did Americans.21 Furthermore, he writes that regardless of age, income, car ownership, spatial development patter, and trip purpose, public transportation systems in Germany attract more riders than public transportation in America.22 Why is this the case?

Germans are clearly not relying primarily on information services to change travel behavior. They have created a policy environment that discourages single-occupant vehicle trips, and encourages travelers to seek alternatives. A decade ago, when public sector traveler information systems were being launched, transportation planners hoped that well-informed travelers would make enlightened travel choices, relieving demand on congested infrastructure. Many further imagined that high quality traffic and transit data and personalized or concierge traveler services could generate revenue, or at least support generation of advertising revenue. For the most part, these visions have not materialized either in the United States or Europe. In the meantime, private sector internet service and in-vehicle navigation device providers are increasingly providing traveler information, prompting (or in some areas re-opening) questions about the appropriate public sector role in the traveler information business. The benefits of traveler information are intuitive, but difficult to independently measure: use of phone, web, and mobile services is quantifiable, but corresponding congestion mitigation benefits cannot be identified as congestion is also impacted by more influential variables such as the price of gasoline and the state of the economy. In Europe, public sector planners nevertheless view information as an important part of their toolkit for influencing traveler behavior. In the United States, many regions are focused on cost-cutting, potentially sacrificing investment in existing services and public sector control over information provided. Program managers in the San Francisco Bay Area are simultaneously seeking efficiencies where possible, exploring alternative business models, and working to maintain a world-class data collection and dissemination system. By continuing to invest in traveler information services, the Bay Area can make optimal use of existing assets, maintain

Compared with the United States, public transportation in Germany is characterized by A longer history and more efficient use of government subsidies; Higher levels and better quality of public transportation supply; Better regional coordination and integration of public transportation services, timetables, financing, and tickets; More multimodal coordination with walking and cycling; and More favorable land use and automobilerestrictive policies that make car use less attractive and encourage public transportation ridership.23

21

Buehler, Ralph, Promoting Public Transportation: Comparison of Passengers and Policies in Germany and the United States, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2110, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington DC, 2009, p 61 Ibid, p. 64 Ibid, p. 65

22 23

16

The German Marshall Fund of the United States

control of core services, and remain positioned to meet ever-changing traveler information and payment needs. For example, implementation of a network of regional high-occupancy toll (HOT) lanes was recently approved by the California Transportation Commission. The charge for using HOT lanes will vary based on congestion. Having the ability to accurately and reliably communicate to drivers about HOT lane pricing is crucial to maximizing the benefits of that new infrastructure. Like their peers in London, Bavaria, and elsewhere in Europe, Bay Area transportation planners believe that the public sector will and should continue to provide accurate, reliable traveler information for the foreseeable future.

Providing Traveler Information Services

17

5
London

Annex A: List of Interviewees

Molly Webb, The Climate Group. (The Climate Group is an independent, not-for-profit organization, working internationally with government and business leaders to advance the smart policies, technologies and finance needed to cut global greenhouse gas emissions, and unlock a clean industrial revolution.) Andy Graham, Managing Director, White Willow Consulting (also Visiting Fellow: City University Transport Hub and Chair: ITS U.K. Co-operative Vehicle Highway System Group.) Chris Lambert, Manager, Trafficlink London. Mario Bozzo, Director, IBI Group (Consultant for London 2012 Games delivering comprehensive Olympic Travel Demand program, which is seeking to suppress, re-route, re-time, and re-mode both journeys.) Transportation and environment researchers at the University of Newcastle: Dr. Margaret Bell, Science City Professor of Transport and Environment; Eric Sampson, Visiting Professor at Newcastle University and City University London (Eric Sampson is also the President of the International Benefits and Evaluation Committee [IBEC] and a Fellow of the Transport Research Foundation. He was elected Chairman of ITS-U.K. in May 2007 and was appointed CBE in the Queens Birthday Honours List 2007. He has worked in the U.K. public sector for for 39 years, retiring in November 2006.); Phil Blythe, Professor of Intelligent Transportation Systems;

Dr. Yvonne Huebner, Senior Research Associate in Intelligent Transport Systems; and Dr. Fabio Galatioto, Transport Operations Group. Keith McCabe, Principal Consultant, Atkins Consulting (and Chair ITS U.K. Carbon Working Group.) Staff at Transport for London: Helen Woolston, Group Environment and Climate Change Coordinator; Phil Young, Client Services Manager, Group New Media; Giles Bailey, Head of Group Marketing Strategy and Integration; and Steve Kearns, Technology Delivery Group. Nick Illsley, Chief Executive, Transport Direct, the national trip planning service for the U.K. Brussels Vanessa Holve, Policy Officer Mobility, Eurocities: The Network of Major European Cities. (Ms. Holve is leader of Segment project to test the use of consumer market segmentation techniques in persuading people to change their travel behavior and adopt more energy efficient forms of transportation.) Juhani Jskelinen, Head of Unit ICT for Transport, European Commission, Information Society and Media Directorate-General. Gzim Ocakoglu, Head of Section, Intelligent Transport Systems, European Commission, Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport.

18

The German Marshall Fund of the United States

Martin Boehm, ITS Deployment, Head of Unit, AustriaTech: Federal Agency for Technological Measures Ltd. Wolfgang Hoefs, ICT for Transport, European Commission, Directorate-General for Information, Society and Media. (Also in attendance was Brian Cronin who serves as the U.S. Department of Transportations Research and Innovative Technology Administrations Joint Program Office Integrated Corridor Management Program Manager.) Traveller Information Services Association (TISA) Heinz-Werner Pfeiffer, TISA Board Member, Robert Bosch GmbH, Car Multimedia, Automotive Navigation and Infotainment Engineering Architecture; Bev Marks, TISA Executive Director; and Stphanie Chaufton. Zeljko Jeftic, Project Manager, ERTICO ITS Europe (working on FREILOT and eCoMOVE projects.) Nurnberg Dipl.-Ing. (FH) Klaus Dechamps, Director for Business Development, and Detlef Maeder, IT Organization for the Public Transit Coordinating Council for Nurnberg. Munich Dr. Ralf Zoellner, Deputy Executive Director, and Alois Muehl, Coordination and Development of Electronic Schedule Information, Muenchner Verkehrs-und Tarifverbund GmbH (Public Transit Coordinating Council for Munich.)

Peter Pollesch and Christoph Maget, Bavarian Ministry of the Interior, Traffic Information Agency Bavaria (Verkehrsinfo Bayern.) Martin Hauschild, BMW Group, Strategy, Targets, Innovation and Vehicle Validation, Department Manager Traffic Technology and Traffic Management. Uwe Strubbe, Director Division Mobility, Siemens. (Responsible for delivering Vekehrsinfo Bayern project as part of the public/ private consortium.) Dr. Hans-Joachim Mentz, President, Mentz Datenverarbeitung GmbH, mdv Transit & Traffic Solutions Inc. (Leading provider of transit trip planning software.) Dr. Fritz Busch, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Geodesy, Chair of Traffic Engineering and Control, Technical University of Munich. Berlin Dipl.-Ing. Michael Beer, Transport Research and Technology, Transport Management, and Lueder Wienberg, ITS Projects, Berlin Senate Department for Urban Development. Torsten Klein, Director, Traffic Management, Central Authority for Streets and Roads, City of Berlin. Dipl.-Ing. Daniel Krueger, VerkehrsManagementZentrale Berlin Betreibergesellschaft mbH (Traffic Management Center of Berlin Operations Group.) Juergen Ross, Division Head, Planning and Customer Information,Verkehrsverbund Berlin Brandenburg (Public Transit Coordinating Council for Berlin/Brandenburg.)

Providing Traveler Information Services

19

6
Phone

Annex B: Overview of Typical U.S. Data Dissemination and Collection Approaches


traffic camera views, and much more. In emergencies, some websites can be quickly updated to provide incident details, maps of alternate driving routes, and advice and support for finding alternatives to automobile travel (i.e. carpooling, park and ride lot locations, enhanced transit services, etc.)
Mobile Websites, Applications, and Texting

Data Dissemination Methods The U.S. Federal Communications Commissions designation of 511 as the national, free Traveler Information phone number over a decade ago spurred the initial deployment of many traveler information systems. Disseminating traveler information by phone has key advantages. Drivers can access information while en route while using a hands-free device. This means they can access information about their trip in time to inform decisions given changing conditions on the road. However, phone systems typically are powered by interactive voice response systems that offer the advantage of being available around the clock, but require elimination of background noise and some knowledge of the phone menu tree for users to successfully obtain information. Some deployers have enhanced their systems to recognize the callers phone number and last trip request and to first offer information on that same trip. Others have established personalized services (i.e. MY 511) that similarly enable users to avoid interaction with a phone menu tree. In general, deployers report that use of phone services is declining, while use of web and mobile services continues to increase. Despite relatively low usage, phone service does meet important objectives such as providing access for users who do not have convenient web access, people with disabilities, and travelers en-route.
Web

Many traveler information services now offer mobile websites, applications, and/or texting in response to user demand and a desire to offer travelers trip planning capability and trip status updates en-route. In general, agencies appear to be experimenting with these offerings based on their specific context. Some agencies are relying on third-party developers to create applications free of charge using data they provide. Others are building and plan to maintain their own proprietary applications. Public sector agencies face a range of challenges when planning to meet the mobile needs of users, including: Consumer device and usage trends are very fluid. Despite significant coverage of increasing use of apps in the media, the Pew Internet and American Life Project reports that Having apps and using apps are not yet synonymous: 35 percent of U.S. adults have cell phones with apps, but only 24 percent of adults actually use them.24 The cost of developing and maintaining mobile services is not insignificant. For example, when offering texting services agencies must decide whether they or the user will bear the cost. Specific design and usability of mobile services crucially affect usage. Just offering a mobile service is not sufficient; it must offer excellent functionality. Furthermore, tools intended to be
24

Traveler information web sites have evolved significantly. In the early 2000s, traveler information websites often provided static information, maps, and links to other sources of information. Over the past decade, websites have become sophisticated pre-trip planning services, the most highly developed of which offer traffic maps showing real-time traffic conditions and incidents, trip planners,

Pew Internet and American Life Project, September 2010.

20

The German Marshall Fund of the United States

used in-vehicle must be designed to minimize driver distraction.


Data Feeds/Application Programming Interfaces (APIs)

use, they often have to collect their own data or pay for someone to do this. The availability of information is a major factor dictating what traveler information service providers can offer.
Traffic Speed/Travel Time Data

Some agencies currently offer free use of their data streams to users and companies for a variety of purposes, such as a part of a larger fused data stream or to develop their own mobile applications. Transport for London (TFL) recently opened their data vaults to the public with the goal of having others develop useful mobile applications using their data.25 The San Francisco Bay Area 511 system operated by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), in Oakland, California has offered transit data free of charge since 2007 and later provided traffic data as well. There are nearly three dozen organizations and individuals registered to receive the transit data feed, and approximately 16 registrants for the traffic data feed. Private data providers fuse the MTC data with their own and provide it to the users, expanding the utility of the data. Data Collection Since the inception of traveler information systems a decade ago, providers of traveler information systems have learned that the key to cost-effectively delivering service is not the availability of technology, but rather the availability of high-quality data, and the willingness and ability of organizations to work together on the back-end. The data collected for use in ATIS systems depends on the services being provided and the availability of potential data sources. Providers of traveler information services have learned that data collection is one of the most significant tasks in providing traveler information. Unless accurate (and regularly maintained), reliable, comprehensive data sources exist for traveler information system providers to
25 Intelligent Cities London: Turning Access Into Apps., Time Magazine, January 17, 2011.

Most agencies provide some level of traffic information (speed, travel time, incident, and/or construction) and transit information. There are three major generations of traffic data collection technologies. These technologies are, in order of decreasing maturity: Infrastructure sensors. This measurement technology uses sensors that are fixed at a specific point on the system and generally report speed, flow, presence, or other vehicle attributes. Examples are loop detectors, radar, and wireless magnetometers. Automated vehicle identification. This measurement technology relies on two sensors: one on the vehicle and one at a fixed point on the system. These sensors work together to measure trip times directly; from these, travel times can be estimated. Examples are toll tag readers, Bluetooth readers, and license plate recognition. Automated vehicle location. This measurement technology is fully encapsulated within various probes on vehicles, with built-in communications back to a cloud service. Examples are smartphones with GPS and connected vehicles utilizing on-board equipment. Traffic data, using any of the above traffic data collection technologies, can be procured from a commercial traffic data services provider, or can be generated by the agency by operating and maintaining the data collection equipment/process. This real-time traffic data then needs to be processed, aggregated, and where there are competing data

Providing Traveler Information Services

21

sources, fused to provide one final data stream that can then be analyzed, disseminated to the public, and archived for future use. There are advantages and disadvantages to all technologies and commercial traffic data services are not available everywhere.
Incident/Construction Data

that allows users to easily view and print the specific schedule data they require. Refining map views to provide sufficient transit-specific data (i.e. stop locations, station maps, etc.). Designing web-based and mobile services to support transit riders in accessing information both for pre-trip planning and en-route updates. These challenges are compounded exponentially when traveler information service providers incorporate transit information into a transit trip planner, or multi-modal trip planner.
Bicycling Data

The gathering of construction data almost always comes from the local roadway transport agency or Department of Transportation. While this data is sometimes automated, the data is usually manually entered into the traveler information system, often in a Traffic Management Center or a Traveler Information Center. Incident data generally comes from local law enforcement or public safety departments. It is collected in a variety of ways, including automated systems that have direct feeds from police/ highway patrol automated dispatching systems to manual methods where operators manually enter incident information into the data collection system.
Transit Data

In regions with significant transit services and/ or multiple transit operators, provision of transit information both static and real-time can be quite complicated and resource-intensive. Challenges include: Defining and enforcing standards and protocols for transfer of transit data. Receiving updated data from transit agencies well enough in advance of planned schedule changes so that new data can be integrated in time. Confirming that data received from transit agencies is accurate, and is accurately incorporated. Displaying transit data for multiple, different types of transit services in a consistent manner

Of the 21 systems surveyed, 10, or approximately 48 percent, currently offer some level of bicycling information on their websites. Bicycling information typically consists of static mapping of designated bike routes, noting those public transport stations that provide bike locker or similar facilities and often provides information on local bicycle laws as well as safety tips for planning a trip. Some systems even allow users to develop bicycle specific trip plans.
Ridesharing Data

The provision of ridesharing varies widely. Of the 21 systems surveyed, roughly a third (38 percent, or eight total) provide rideshare data. For most systems, this consists of providing information (and often separate links) to vanpool, carpool and in some cases school pool (school-based ridesharing) information. Many systems also map park and ride facilities, high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes and provide links to ride matching systems.
Other Data Types

To further refine and improve mapping and trip planning applications, public providers of traveler information services would like access to other datasets including:

22

The German Marshall Fund of the United States

Parking information, both static (location, policies, pricing) and real-time (space availability), and Accessibility information (transit vehicle accessibility, station and stop amenities such as elevators and curb cuts, and accessible pathways for transit transfers). Unless such datasets are created and maintained by third parties, the cost of data collection often prohibits integration of these data types. In the future, electric vehicle infrastructure information (e.g. charger locations) will also likely be desired by the public.

Providing Traveler Information Services

23

Annex C: Providing Public Traveler Information Services with Decreasing Funding: U.S. Trends
Determining ad rates for various media (511 signs, websites, phone applications, personalization options, etc.), and Investing up-front in development to support advertising services with an uncertain revenue return.
Personalized Services and Subscription Services

Public sector providers of traveler information are under pressure to decrease program costs and/or generate revenue to cover program costs. In addition to cost-cutting strategies, a variety of revenuegeneration strategies have been tested by deployers.
Advertising on Public Traveler Information Services

Government agencies have been hesitant to incorporate sponsorship or advertising into their public-facing services, but that trend may be changing. Given that consumers are increasingly difficult to reach through traditional media, such as TV and radio advertising, public sector assets (such as highway signs, and phone and web services) are very attractive to businesses. In an August 5, 2011, a Wall Street Journal article entitled Dot-Gov Web Sites and Ad Revenues: Why Not Cash In? Mark Lewyn encourages public sector providers of services to take advantage of the potential to generate advertising revenue on public websites: Shouldnt government find creative new ways to raise revenue before it imposes higher taxes on anybody?...[it is] misguided to blithely close the door on a potentially valuable new source of government revenue just as our financial gas tank is running on empty.26 Several deployers report that the amount of revenue that can be generated through web advertising is disappointing, but others reply that recouping any amount of revenue to defer the cost of providing service is worthwhile. Challenges to implementing advertising on traveler information services include: Ensuring that the advertisements do not detract from the main purpose of the system, Developing and maintaining the advertisement systems and media, or hiring a contractor to manage them,

A decade ago, traveler information service providers believed that if their services were sufficiently accurate, reliable, accessible in attractive and easy-to-use formats and even perhaps personalized for individual needs, users would be willing to pay for them. This has not been the case. Both in the United States and in Europe, consumers of data are generally not willing to pay for services, but will instead turn elsewhere for this data. This is particularly true of end-users but also of many consumers of data feeds. While public sector agencies may believe there is value in data that is highly customized for a local area, the primary value is in that area and such detail is of little interest to data aggregators working to fulfill national or international business plans. Local consumers may value highly customized data, but are still nevertheless unwilling to pay for it.
Sponsorship Model & Public/Private Partnerships

Public/private partnerships for deliver of traveler information can be divided into two main categories: 1. Contractual arrangements in which the contractor is primarily required to deliver service and is also incentivized to generate revenue from a combination of advertising and sales of traveler information data and/or services, or 2. Traveler information services are provided free of charge to the public sector by companies to the extent that advertising revenues support them.

26

Lewyn, Mark, Dot-Gov Web Sites and Ad Revenues: Why Not Cash In? Adopt-a-highway programs often feature corporate sponsors, Wall Street Journal, August 5, 2011.

24

The German Marshall Fund of the United States

The first model is currently in use in Los Angeles and in the Munich region. Because of the challenges discussed above associated with generating advertising or value-added services revenue, it is unlikely that contractors can meet projected revenue goals. Contracts will likely be renegotiated and/or restructured at the next opportunity. Under the second model where services are provided free of charge advertising plays a primary role. At present there are only two states systems, Georgia and Massachusetts, that are free to the state DOTs. Funding for Georgias system is primarily generated by advertising/sponsorship on highway signs. In Massachusetts, advertising is incorporated into the web, texting, and phone systems, and the new automated system is significantly different (and many users argue less useful and accurate) than the system previously provided. Both Florida and San Diego are developing requests for proposals for traveler information systems that would be similarly advertising-driven and free of charge. The Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) released an RFP earlier this year seeking partners who would generate sufficient revenue to cover 511 program costs, and share any excess revenue with ODOT. The RFP states Revenue generated by the program will be shared between the program manager and the Department It is ODOTs express intent to utilize sponsorship as the only means of funding this program. A major task of the program manager will be to find the sponsorship necessary to fully fund this program.27 Providers of services such as text messaging or other specific applications sometimes offer their service free of charge to the public agency but retain the right to cover their costs through adver27

tising. System users would therefore encounter advertising only when using those specific services and not throughout the phone and web.

State of Ohio Department of Transportation Invitation to Bid, Opening date 6/30/11, Invitation 461-11.

Providing Traveler Information Services

25

Offices
Washington Berlin Paris Brussels Belgrade Ankara Bucharest Warsaw

www.gmfus.org

You might also like