Thread by @ChittiMarco, 1/ We talk a lot about density, economy, behaviour, oil price, urban [...]

1/ We talk a lot about density, economy, behaviour, oil price, urban form, geography and even race as factors impacting transit usage. An analysis of traffic patterns on regional trains in Italy between 2011 and 2018 suggest a simpler answer: “It’s the OFFER, stupid!” A thread

2/ Between 2011 and 2018, passengers on regional and local trains in Italy have barely increased nationally, from 2,87 million to 2,91 million on an average weekday. But this stagnating numbers hide very different trends at regional level

3/ Daily boardings from a sample of big and small regions
2011-2018 (Δ%)

Lombardia
650k

802k (+23.4%)
Lazio
540k

545k (+0.9%)
Campania
467k

262k (-43%)
Emilia-Romagna
114k

215k (+89%)
Piemonte
175k

177k (+1.3%)
Puglia
108k

140k (+29%)
Trentino
13k

27k (+107%)

4/ What is the main cause of such a strong difference in performance between regions? Is it demography, economy, or something else?

5/ Population-wise, Italy has grown slowly (59.3-60.3M). During the same 2011-18 period, Lombardy gained 350k inh. (9.66 to 10M), Emilia-Romagna gained 120k (4.33 to 4.55M). But Campania, the worst performer in terms of ridership, gained population too: 140k (5.76 to 5.8M)

6/ Economy-wise, GDP growth has been sluggish in Italy since the double 2009 and 2011-13 recessions. Even if it’s true that the crisis hit harder in the weaker southern regions, Puglia in the south has experienced a strong growth in ridership as Piedmont stagnated

7/ So, the correct answer seems: something else! And precisely the main factor is the SERVICE OFFERED, in terms of both quality ad quantity.

8/ In terms of quantity, between 2011-18 :

Lombardy increased the number of train*km offered from 37.5M to 44.9M (+20%). Ridership increased by 23%

In Campania, train*Km offered shrunk from 11.8M to 9.9M (-20%). Ridership decreased by 43%

9/ In terms of quality, Lombardy is slowly transitioning to a clockface 15'/30’/60’, at least for the larger Milan RER network. Campania, that used to have several 20’ suburban railways, has turned back to irregular schedule as service shrunk and maintenance deteriorated.

10/ Same considerations can be done for the rolling stock itself. Regions that experienced a ridership growth, have also seen a reduction of the average age of circulating trains. Behind both quality and quantity there are three single factors: money, money and money

11/ This figure shows the funds each region allocate to rail service on top of their quota of the 4.8bn national transit fund in 2018. Lazio and Campania, two bad performers, put nothing on operation and little on train purchase. Lombardy puts almost 1% of its regional budget

12/ Campania is a sad story in itself. After pioneering fare integration and comprehensive mobility planning in the 1990s and 2000s, it experienced a dramatic decline in ridership due to national and local budget cuts to transit spending and fare integration is today in jeopardy.

13/ On the other hand, Trentino continued to invest in expanding the service, integrating train and bus fares, developing a region-wide clockface system, etc. As a result, this little mountain province more than doubled its ridership (and they have cute pinkish trains!)

14/ In Italy, offer seems the most important single factor impacting transit usage. As cities are mostly dense enough for good transit, lack of offer is the real disease, due to decades of underinvestment and excessively low fares that makes Italy a laggard among European peers.

15/ Needless to say, there are many more factors at play as urban structure in Italy and North America differs importantly. But the universal moral is:

"run those f**ing trains, and they will come!"

(and stop talking about **FREE** transit, you'll end up killing it)

End note: most datas and charts are from this "Pendolaria" report made by Legambiente (an environnemental NGO):
https://www.legambiente.it/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Rapporto-Pendolaria-2019.pdf

Latest Threads Unrolled: