Findings
Initial impacts - demand and revenue
The impact of the trial on ScotRail journeys is estimated to be:
- An increase in the range of 1m - 1.1m journeys over the first 11 weeks of the trial; and
- This equates to an increase in the range of 2.7m - 3.0m journeys over six months.
Only limited demand growth was forecast to occur in the initial weeks of the trial, with total ScotRail journeys forecast to be 1.6% higher by w/c 10th December than the counterfactual. Actual journeys (an increase of between 1m to 1.1m) were 4.2% above the counterfactual at this point.
This journey growth is greater than expected and will be investigated further as there appears to be cases where customers are making single trips but buying returns where fares have been equalised. Potentially the reported journeys increase is overstated by 20% simply by ticket sales. This will be a key factor to investigate further over the remainder of the trial period.
The impact so far of the ‘Off-Peak all day long’ trial on ScotRail revenues is estimated to be:
- A loss in the range of £4.5m-£4.8m over the first 11 weeks of the trial; and
- A loss in the range of £10.2m-£10.6m over six months – within the initial budget envelope of £15m for the trial.
There are geographic variations across the ScotRail network. Typically, and as anticipated the strongest growth in journeys is where the fares changes arising from the trial are larger (Express – 10.9% increase; West Suburban 7.6% increase), and lowest where the fares changes have been limited (Scenic 0.8% increase).
See Figure 1 overleaf for area definition (which are standard ScotRail service groups). The ScotRail service groups are shown geographically:
Scenic is north of Inverness, the West Highlands and the South East. Intercity is between Scotlands 7 cities excluding Edinburgh to Glasgow., East Suburban is the Fife Circle, Borders and slower services in the Edinburgh Glasgow Corridor, Express is fast Edinburgh Glasgow services, West Suburban is the Greater Glasgow area.
The analysis demonstrates stronger growth in journeys at peak times and more pronounced changes during the morning peak. This impact on peak journeys is supported by research with customers that indicates that 18% have shifted some of their journeys into the peak from the off-peak.
Error loading Partial View script (file: ~/Views/MacroPartials/ImageWithoutCrop.cshtml)Analysis also demonstrates there are increased loads on trains in the peak periods leading to a heightened level of crowding on some trains. Research with passengers suggests that levels of crowding, at this point, have not increased to the extent that it is a disincentive to make that journey by rail, but passengers may change their journey time to avoid specific trains. This is a crucial factor to continue to assess as the trial continues.
There are observable changes in the ticket type mix – this is most pronounced in the Express service group - which need to be validated as the trial progresses:
- Switching from Season tickets to daily tickets although Season ticket usage is demonstrating resilience. There has been no significant decline since an initial drop in the first week of the trial;
- Higher reduction in Anytime Return fares appears to have resulted in switching from Single fares;
- Switching between Off-Peak and Peak return tickets although this likely to be predominantly a function of the retailing approach (where both ticket types have remained on sale, with the off-peak restrictions removed, for technical reasons), rather than an indicator of changing behaviours;
There is some emerging evidence of behaviour change arising from the trial including shifting of travel from off peak to peak and mode shift to rail from car with research (detailed below) suggesting around a third of existing rail users have made at least one rail journey previously undertaken by other modes, with two thirds of those journeys primarily from car.
Almost 70% of those making new trips by rail indicated that they previously undertook these journeys by another mode of transport, with the remainder (30%) being new trips. Of those switching from other modes, over half (53%) had previously used a car as a driver, and a third(33%) had switched from bus. But this should be considered in the context of a 4.3% increase in demand – the vast majority of passengers were existing rail users making journeys as usual.
The modelling results (for the VfM analysis) show similar but not identical outcomes. They suggest that just over a third of additional rail journeys are new trips (very similar to the survey work at 30%). However, the modelling suggested that around 25% of mode shift would be from car with the majority of the remainder from bus.
Thus, at this early stage there is some uncertainty around the extent of mode shift from different modes but the survey work suggests that it is higher than predicted from private car. For the full evaluation, work will be undertaken with bus operators to ensure that their experience and data is fully reflected in the final results.
It is recognised that the first 11 weeks may not be representative of a longer trial particularly as the weeks before Christmas are typically some of the busiest of the year.
There are also a number of findings arising from the analysis and research that require further investigation and validation over the remaining trial period to inform the Final Evaluation Report.
Improve awareness of rail as a viable travel choice
In terms of the trial, 61% of all respondents stated they were aware of the trial. This was highest amongst those rail users who had changed how and when they travel, and lowest amongst those who do not currently travel by rail. This fits with the figure reported by ScotRail (70%) in terms of the awareness of the trial (as the TS survey included non-rail users who are less likely to be aware of changes to the rail system).
The rail users were asked to consider how satisfied they are with rail travel. In total 81% of rail users were either satisfied (52%) or very satisfied (29%). In terms of measuring a change in carriage occupancy, 44% of respondents remarked that they perceived carriages during the pilot as being “usually just the same” as they were prior to the commencement of the pilot. A quarter of respondents, however, did think carriages were busier.
Furthermore, there was a high level of satisfaction amongst new rail users, where 77% of respondents noted that they were either satisfied or very satisfied with their experiences travelling by rail. When making a journey, 36% of responses indicated that they felt carriages were usually half-full with seats still available; conversely, 30% felt that carriages were nearly full with most seats taken.
When asked how likely they would be to continue using rail after the end of the pilot, 31% indicated that they would definitely continue to use rail and 54% indicated that it would be either highly (27%) or somewhat (27%) likely that they continue to use rail beyond the pilot.
Improve access to rail by reducing the cost of travel at peak times, enabling more people to travel more often
New Trips
Of respondents who indicated that they now make new trips by rail, 45% make one new return trip by rail a week and a third make two new return trips per week.
As with the main purpose of travelling by rail, leisure was the most popular purpose provided by 50% of respondents making new trips. Just under a third highlighted commuting as the purpose of these new trips (29%).
A third of respondents who were existing rail users (38%) felt they now saved money as part of the trial. The average reported cost saving was £7 per week for those who previously purchased an off-peak ticket (compared with what a peak ticket would have cost), while those who indicated they previously purchased an anytime ticket, the average saving was considered to be £10 a week. Given the actual changes in ticket prices, this is an issue that will be investigated more fully over the remainder of the trial but appears to be due to different journey types between different user groups.
New Rail Users
There are some indications that the pilot has also attracted new rail users. However, this sample group was small compared to existing rail users as it is a typically hard group to reach group (due to the limited number of people within it). This sample group accounted for 11% of the total sample, which is adequate to provide some indication of the behaviour of new rail users.
For this group of respondents new to rail travel, 41% indicated making a new trip by rail which they did not previously make by any mode.
The survey also asked new rail users about the impact of the pilot on their decision to switch mode. 78% indicated that the pilot was a very important factor in making this change, and 66% of those within this group who changed when they travelled indicated it was because of the pilot.
Reduction in private car travel as more people choose to travel by rail
Almost 70% of those making new trips by rail indicated that they previously undertook these journeys by another mode of transport. Over half (53%) had previously used a car as a driver, and 33% had switched from bus. However, this analysis is based on a small sample size and should be interpreted with caution.
Nonetheless, these results are a useful indicator that suggest people are choosing to swap a car journey for a rail journey. Since they have switched to rail, both the number of trips per week and the stated journey purpose remain similar as to the number and purpose of their previous trips.
When asked if they had changed when they travel, a few interesting trends emerged; 30% of respondents noted a change from travelling in the off-peak to the peak. Conversely, 16% indicated a switch in the opposite direction, from peak to off-peak. 52% of respondents indicated that they have not changed when they travel.
In terms of understanding the motivation to start using rail travel over other modes, 38% of responses indicated that the pilot was a very important factor in their decision to start using rail instead of their previous mode of transport, but just over a fifth (21%) of people indicated that the pilot was not an important factor.
Barriers to rail travel / what make you switch
The survey also reached out to those who do not use rail to find out the barriers to using rail. This question allowed multiple answers from respondents and so is not directly linked to number of responses. The top three reasons in order were:
- “Trains are too expensive”
- “I have a car and do not want to pay more for travel”
- “trains are too unreliable.”
The most popular reasons that would encourage this group to travel by rail, in order, were:
- “lower ticket prices”.
- “certainty of a seat”
- “more convenient train times” and “increased reliability”.
Of those who do not travel by rail, 28% of respondents indicated that they were aware of the pilot and they were somewhat likely to use rail, and a further 19% indicated they were very likely to use rail. A higher percentage of this group (35%) did say they were however, not very likely to use rail, or won’t use it at all.
Value for money – interim assessment
The baseline results of the Transport Model for Scotland suggested that the pilot would increase rail demand by 2.2% (compared with a Scotrail prediction of 1.6%). This was significantly lower than initial assumptions made by Transport Scotland (up to 8% over the full pilot period). The current estimate from ScotRail based on their counterfactual analysis is that the pilot increased demand by 4.2% over the first 11 weeks.
Using the model in calibrated form, with a demand impact of 4.2%, produces impacts on revenue in line with that reported by ScotRail and an impact on bus patronage in line with the survey results reported above. At this early stage this gives strong confidence that the approach is analytically valid. The approach also takes into consideration the initial additional costs incurred by ScotRail in running the pilot (in terms of additional train capacity that was made available).
It is judged however, that at this stage of the pilot the results are still subject to considerable uncertainty. Table 4 below shows the VfM assessment (in terms of a Benefit Cost ratio) for various changes in rail demand (although note that the additional costs to ScotRail are held constant for the different demand scenarios).
In terms of headline Value for Money results, the calibrated model shows a benefit cost ratio of 1.18 – a return of £1.18 for every £1 of government investment (cover of loss of revenue to ScotRail plus additional operating costs). Whilst this is positive, it is somewhat marginal and the final result will be dependent on a range of factors including further impacts of demand, any additional costs incurred and refinement of the counterfactual. By way of illustration, if the number of additional journeys is overstated by 20% (because of purchases of tickets that are not used as detailed above) then the BCR falls to 1.13.
| Change in Demand | Benefit Cost Ratio |
|---|---|
| 0% | 1 |
| 2.17% (TMfS) base | 1.07 |
| 3.36% (Accounting for 20% overstatement in journeys) | 1.13 |
| 4.2% (Current estimate, 11 weeks) | 1.18 |