Navigating low Demand Landscapes: A comprehensive exploration of sustainable transportation strategies

Transport choices can impact land use as much as land use can influence people's travel behaviour, (De Vos and Witlox, 2013). People’s lives are directly impacted by urban spatial planning and land use patterns. The transport mode chosen by people is influenced by the proximity of urban centres with services (such as schools or workplaces) to residential areas. It is therefore clear that an unbalanced spatial arrangement can have a negative impact on quality of life due to prolonged travel times and restricted access to urban facilities. Urban planning over the years has focused on spatial integration toward an accessible, mixed and equitable territory. Indeed, a mixed land use increases user accessibility to different kind of services (Attard et al., 2023). In contexts where planning does not support a mixed distribution of functions the need for long commutes to functional places such as schools or work arises. Here the role of transport is crucial, and it must be based on principles of accessibility and equity in enabling sustainable movement through the territory (Bruzzone et al., 2023). However, the preference is often for the individual solutions over public transport (PT), which increases levels of externalities produced, especially air and noise pollution which have a bearing on climate change and sustainability (Guzman and Bocarejo, 2017). This situation is more likely to occur in rural areas, but also in urban and peri-urban areas if the PT service is not satisfactory, resulting in reduced accessibility (Carroll et al., 2021). The choice of a PT system over the private car depends on the level of demand density (Libardo and Nocera, 2008). In the presence of high or stable demand, fixed-route bus systems with variable stop locations are more efficient. Whereas in low demand areas, flexible transport systems are preferable: here, limited PT services create a vicious circle, leading people to choose cars for convenience and practicality. The well-known cycle described in Figure 24.1 is the main cause-effect of a weak transport system in low demand areas. The situation is aggravated when the decline in ridership reduces the revenue of PT operators. In this case, they tend to reduce frequency to keep the service financially affordable (Nocera, 2010). After the failed attempt in the 1960s to design cities around the car, there is now a widespread belief in the need to share responsibility for passenger transport between the different modes. Due to dispersed demand in sprawled cities, PT faces challenges in providing attractive services both for leisure and for systematic trips. Additionally, for travel between cities and regions, the low concentration of demand further limits the attractiveness of PT (Kirchhoff, 1995). The increasing ownership of cars however represents the main cause of decrease in demand for buses. And as a response operators raise fares, which contributed to the ongoing cycle (White, 2017). The influence between transport and land use is bidirectional. A more rigorous integration between land use and transport planning can be the key towards a more sustainable way of travelling, especially in low demand areas (Circella and Pagliara, 2020). Starting from these premises, this chapter presents the link between low demand areas and PT services, as well as the existing and consolidated challenges for PT operators, showing how PT cannot address the issue of transport in low demand areas alone. The first part of this chapter presents the close connections between spatial planning dynamics and transport in areas characterised by low travel demand, followed by the specific challenges faced by PT. The second part illustrate the consequences of this condition and presents some possible solutions to develop modern, efficient and sustainable alternatives to private motorized transport in low demand areas.