18.11.2015 Views

travel-in-london-understanding-our-diverse-communities

travel-in-london-understanding-our-diverse-communities

travel-in-london-understanding-our-diverse-communities

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Transport for London 1


Travel <strong>in</strong> London: understand<strong>in</strong>g <strong>our</strong> <strong>diverse</strong> <strong>communities</strong><br />

2015<br />

A summary of exist<strong>in</strong>g research<br />

Contents<br />

How to use this document ........................................................................... 5<br />

Sett<strong>in</strong>g the scene ........................................................................................ 7<br />

Summary ................................................................................................... 13<br />

Summary: Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) Londoners ................ 22<br />

Summary: Women .................................................................................... 68<br />

Summary: Older people ........................................................................... 114<br />

Summary: Younger people ....................................................................... 156<br />

Summary: Disabled People ..................................................................... 200<br />

Summary: People on lower <strong>in</strong>come ......................................................... 267<br />

Summary: Lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) Londoners ............................ 308<br />

Bibliography ............................................................................................ 317<br />

Glossary .................................................................................................. 320<br />

Appendix A: Equality groups <strong>in</strong> London boroughs ................................... 324<br />

Transport for London 2


Confidentiality<br />

Please note that the copyright <strong>in</strong> the attached report is owned by Transport for<br />

London (TfL) and the provision of <strong>in</strong>formation under the Freedom of Information<br />

Act does not give the recipient a right to reuse the <strong>in</strong>formation <strong>in</strong> a way that would<br />

<strong>in</strong>fr<strong>in</strong>ge copyright (for example, by publish<strong>in</strong>g and issu<strong>in</strong>g copies to the public).<br />

Brief extracts of the material may be reproduced under the fair deal<strong>in</strong>g provisions<br />

of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 for the purposes of research for<br />

non-commercial purposes, private study, criticism, review and news report<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

Details of the arrangements for reus<strong>in</strong>g the material owned by TfL for any other<br />

purpose can be obta<strong>in</strong>ed by contact<strong>in</strong>g enquire@tfl.gov.uk.<br />

Transport for London 3


Preface<br />

The Equality Act 2010 requires that TfL and other public bodies have due regard<br />

for all of London’s <strong>communities</strong> when develop<strong>in</strong>g services.<br />

In this document we set out <strong>in</strong> detail a collection of research that we have<br />

undertaken or commissioned to identify the different barriers faced by London’s<br />

<strong>communities</strong> when access<strong>in</strong>g transport. We also describe <strong>travel</strong> patterns, the<br />

behavi<strong>our</strong> of different groups, and attitudes towards issues such as fares, personal<br />

safety and security and satisfaction with the services we offer.<br />

We <strong>in</strong>tend for this to be a s<strong>our</strong>ce document for TfL, to help staff to fulfil their<br />

responsibilities to London’s <strong>diverse</strong> <strong>communities</strong> when design<strong>in</strong>g and deliver<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>our</strong> services.<br />

The document also provides <strong>in</strong>formation for stakeholders, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g those from<br />

different <strong>communities</strong>, to <strong>in</strong>form their engagement with TfL.<br />

Transport for London 4


How to use this document<br />

This document is a collection of research data focus<strong>in</strong>g on <strong>travel</strong> <strong>in</strong> London among<br />

equality groups.<br />

The data that we have used comes from a number of s<strong>our</strong>ces, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g qualitative<br />

and quantitative research that TfL has commissioned, published third party<br />

reports and external s<strong>our</strong>ces such as the 2011 Census and other <strong>in</strong>formation from<br />

the Office for National Statistics (ONS). The London Travel Demand Survey<br />

(LTDS) is <strong>our</strong> own survey of transport use among Londoners and we have used this<br />

extensively throughout this report.<br />

We have identified seven groups of Londoners who experience a variety of barriers<br />

when access<strong>in</strong>g public transport:<br />

1. Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic groups (referred to as BAME throughout)<br />

2. Women<br />

3. Older Londoners (aged 65 and over)<br />

4. Younger Londoners (aged 24 and under)<br />

5. Disabled Londoners<br />

6. Londoners on lower <strong>in</strong>comes (with household <strong>in</strong>come of less than £20,000 per<br />

year)<br />

7. Lesbian, gay and bisexual Londoners (referred to as LGB throughout) – We<br />

recognise that there may be barriers to transport faced by some transgender<br />

women and men, however TfL does not yet have sufficient data to provide a<br />

detailed analysis<br />

We have presented data from the perspective of the equality group <strong>in</strong> question.<br />

Each chapter follows a similar structure. Here is a brief description of each section:<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

Profile – covers the demographic profile of each group<br />

Transport behavi<strong>our</strong> – addresses modes of transport used; j<strong>our</strong>ney purpose<br />

and tickets used<br />

Barriers – looks at what prevents Londoners <strong>in</strong> equality groups from us<strong>in</strong>g<br />

public transport more often. This section also covers issues related to safety<br />

and security when <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> London<br />

Customer satisfaction – considers how satisfied users of each type of<br />

transport are overall, perceptions of value for money and what drives<br />

satisfaction levels<br />

Access to <strong>in</strong>formation – addresses the <strong>in</strong>formation needs of each group,<br />

access to the <strong>in</strong>ternet and <strong>in</strong>ternet behavi<strong>our</strong>, use of the TfL website and<br />

smartphone use<br />

We have used a number<strong>in</strong>g system to reference the s<strong>our</strong>ces of <strong>in</strong>formation <strong>in</strong> this<br />

report, with the number cited <strong>in</strong> square brackets [x]. You can f<strong>in</strong>d the<br />

correspond<strong>in</strong>g number and <strong>in</strong>formation s<strong>our</strong>ce <strong>in</strong> the bibliography at the end of<br />

this report. This report uses a variety of data, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g qualitative and<br />

quantitative research commissioned by TfL, and published third party reports.<br />

Transport for London 5


We have also <strong>in</strong>cluded a glossary for unfamiliar term<strong>in</strong>ology at the end of the<br />

report.<br />

You can f<strong>in</strong>d further data on borough comparisons <strong>in</strong> Appendix A.<br />

You may also wish to refer to TfL’s S<strong>in</strong>gle Equality Scheme (SES) and SES Action<br />

Plan, both of which you can f<strong>in</strong>d on the TfL website.<br />

Transport for London 6


Sett<strong>in</strong>g the scene<br />

Understand<strong>in</strong>g the <strong>travel</strong> needs of London’s <strong>diverse</strong> c<strong>communities</strong>: a summary of<br />

exist<strong>in</strong>g research<br />

Context<br />

The Mayor published his Transport Strategy (MTS) <strong>in</strong> 2010. The strategy describes<br />

how we should develop London’s transport system if we are to deliver the best<br />

possible service for all people liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>, work<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> and visit<strong>in</strong>g London [1].<br />

Our Capital’s transport system should excel among world cities, provid<strong>in</strong>g access<br />

and opportunities for all of its people and enterprises, achiev<strong>in</strong>g the highest<br />

environmental standards and lead<strong>in</strong>g the world <strong>in</strong> tackl<strong>in</strong>g the urban transport<br />

challenges of the 21st century [1].<br />

The current MTS sets out the priorities for London over a 20 year period to 2030.<br />

TfL publishes an Accessibility Implementation Plan alongside the MTS which<br />

expla<strong>in</strong>s how and when we will carry out improvements, along with the expected<br />

outcomes. We monitor this closely to ensure that TfL is deliver<strong>in</strong>g the best for <strong>our</strong><br />

<strong>diverse</strong> <strong>communities</strong>.<br />

London: a grow<strong>in</strong>g city<br />

London is grow<strong>in</strong>g rapidly, and at a rate faster than previously estimated. The<br />

2011 Census showed that London had grown by one million people <strong>in</strong> 10 years [2].<br />

The 2011 London Plan predicted that London would grow to a population of 8.6<br />

million by 2026 [3], but the population is already approach<strong>in</strong>g this number [4].<br />

We now expect London’s population to reach 10 million by 2030 (2m people more<br />

than <strong>in</strong> 2013) – equivalent to the populations of Manchester, Bristol and<br />

Birm<strong>in</strong>gham all mov<strong>in</strong>g to the capital [4].<br />

London: a <strong>diverse</strong>, chang<strong>in</strong>g city<br />

London is hugely <strong>diverse</strong>, and this diversity is <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g with the grow<strong>in</strong>g<br />

population.<br />

One of the changes is an <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g proportion of BAME Londoners, which is<br />

projected to reach 50 per cent of the Greater London population by 2038 and is<br />

projected to <strong>in</strong>crease from 3.3 million <strong>in</strong> 2011 to 5.2 million <strong>in</strong> 2041 [5].<br />

Transport for London 7


Chang<strong>in</strong>g proportion of Londoners of White / BAME ethnicity [5]<br />

The growth <strong>in</strong> London’s BAME population is not expected to be even across each<br />

group. Far greater growth is predicted <strong>in</strong> Ch<strong>in</strong>ese and Asian <strong>communities</strong> than<br />

black Caribbean and Indian. The percentage growth for each of the <strong>communities</strong> is<br />

shown <strong>in</strong> the table below [5].<br />

Chang<strong>in</strong>g proportion of Londoners by ethnicity [5]<br />

Community<br />

% <strong>in</strong>crease<br />

2011-2041<br />

White 4.4<br />

Black Caribbean 7.2<br />

Indian 38.5<br />

Black African 52.4<br />

Bangladeshi 54.7<br />

Pakistani 57.2<br />

Ch<strong>in</strong>ese 59.9<br />

Other 74.4<br />

Other Asian 87.9<br />

Black other 94.1<br />

Although <strong>in</strong>ternational immigration <strong>in</strong>to London is fall<strong>in</strong>g, previously higher levels<br />

now mean that over half (55 per cent) of live births <strong>in</strong> London <strong>in</strong> 2012 were to<br />

mothers born overseas [6].<br />

The population is age<strong>in</strong>g, with a predicted <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> London’s population aged<br />

over 65 <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g by 75 per cent between 2011 and 2041 compared with a 26 per<br />

cent <strong>in</strong>crease of the Greater London population as a whole [4].<br />

The geographic distribution of age groups across London varies, and therefore the<br />

transport challenges <strong>in</strong> each area will vary. The map below demonstrates that<br />

Transport for London 8


outer London has a higher proportion of people over 75 years of age. Demand for<br />

accessible transport <strong>in</strong> these areas may be higher as a result of this population<br />

composition [5].<br />

Predicted geographic distribution of over 75s <strong>in</strong> 2031 [5]<br />

The proportion of younger Londoners (under 25) is predicted to <strong>in</strong>crease at a<br />

slower rate than the rest of the population with a 13 per cent <strong>in</strong>crease between<br />

2011 and 2041 [5].<br />

Increas<strong>in</strong>g challenges<br />

As London’s population growth outstrips <strong>in</strong>creases <strong>in</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g supply, prices with<strong>in</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>ner London are ris<strong>in</strong>g. In time, those with lower <strong>in</strong>comes will be priced out of the<br />

<strong>in</strong>ner London area, result<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> a move towards outer London. It is vital, therefore,<br />

to ensure that access to transport services cont<strong>in</strong>ues to improve, l<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g people to<br />

higher paid jobs.<br />

S<strong>in</strong>ce 2006 the average number of jobs available with<strong>in</strong> 45 m<strong>in</strong>utes <strong>travel</strong> time by<br />

public transport has <strong>in</strong>creased by 6.2% for London residents [7]. This trend needs<br />

to cont<strong>in</strong>ue <strong>in</strong> order to <strong>in</strong>crease access for <strong>our</strong> <strong>diverse</strong> <strong>communities</strong>.<br />

Transport for London 9


Predicted employment growth 2011 – 2036 (measurement: number of additional jobs) [11]<br />

The number of trips made each day on public transport by disabled Londoners has<br />

<strong>in</strong>creased from 0.50 per person per day to 0.57 <strong>in</strong> 10 years s<strong>in</strong>ce 2001. However,<br />

this is still lower than 0.86 per day for the whole population. Of these trips, the bus<br />

is more popular than for the general population (0.44 trips per day compared with<br />

0.40) [8].<br />

Many Londoners suffer health problems from lack of physical activity. The number<br />

of walk<strong>in</strong>g trips per day for people under 20 between 2001 and 2011 has decreased<br />

as shown below [7]. Similarly, <strong>in</strong> the period 2013-14 obesity <strong>in</strong> children <strong>in</strong> London<br />

was over 18% higher than across the rest of England [9].<br />

Conversely, walk<strong>in</strong>g trips have <strong>in</strong>creased among some of the older age groups<br />

s<strong>in</strong>ce 2011, particularly for men. The pattern for women changes significantly<br />

through their lifetime. The number of trips between the age of 30 and 54 for<br />

women <strong>in</strong>creased between 2001 and 2011 and at age 35-39 women’s walk trips are<br />

almost double that of men [7].<br />

Transport for London 10


Walk<strong>in</strong>g trip rates (average weekday) for London residents, by age and gender, for the<br />

years 2001 and 2011 [7]<br />

Men <strong>in</strong> 2001<br />

Men <strong>in</strong> 2011<br />

Women <strong>in</strong> 2001<br />

Women <strong>in</strong> 2011<br />

Address<strong>in</strong>g these challenges through transport<br />

An accessible transport system is vital to help address these challenges, to provide<br />

opportunities for all of <strong>our</strong> <strong>diverse</strong> <strong>communities</strong> and to make life <strong>in</strong> London better.<br />

Access to a range of transport modes improves access to employment, health,<br />

education and leisure services for Londoners. Enabl<strong>in</strong>g walk<strong>in</strong>g and cycl<strong>in</strong>g for as<br />

many as possible as part of a j<strong>our</strong>ney, or as the entire j<strong>our</strong>ney will be an important<br />

aspect of reduc<strong>in</strong>g emissions and improv<strong>in</strong>g Londoners’ health.<br />

We are committed to provid<strong>in</strong>g accessible transport and support<strong>in</strong>g Londoners<br />

and those visit<strong>in</strong>g the capital to <strong>travel</strong> irrespective of physical abilities or perceived<br />

barriers.<br />

In order to understand what the barriers to <strong>travel</strong> are and what can be done to<br />

address them, we conduct and commission extensive surveys, research and<br />

consultation. As well as listen<strong>in</strong>g to <strong>our</strong> customers and stakeholders <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g<br />

specific <strong>in</strong>dependent advisory boards such as the IDAG (Independent Disability<br />

Advisory Group), we have developed <strong>our</strong> S<strong>in</strong>gle Equality Scheme (SES). The SES<br />

sets out <strong>our</strong> goals and activity to remove barriers to <strong>travel</strong> <strong>in</strong> London.<br />

TfL <strong>in</strong>vests funds across the entire network to improve <strong>our</strong> service. Recent<br />

improvements <strong>in</strong>clude:<br />

Increas<strong>in</strong>g the number of pedestrian cross<strong>in</strong>gs with Countdown timers to 340<br />

sites across London<br />

Transport for London 11


Expansion of the Travel Better campaign, which <strong>in</strong>cludes rais<strong>in</strong>g awareness of<br />

the need to be considerate on the Tube, particularly ensur<strong>in</strong>g seats are<br />

provided for those that may need them<br />

39 additional pedestrian cross<strong>in</strong>gs have been upgraded to provide tactile<br />

pav<strong>in</strong>g and rotat<strong>in</strong>g cones/audible alerts. We are aim<strong>in</strong>g to have upgraded all<br />

cross<strong>in</strong>gs to this standard by 2016<br />

Additional step free access at stations, with works cont<strong>in</strong>u<strong>in</strong>g at Bond Street,<br />

Greenford, Tottenham C<strong>our</strong>t Road, Vauxhall, Victoria and F<strong>in</strong>sbury Park<br />

45 per cent of Tube and rail stations are now step-free<br />

Tactile pav<strong>in</strong>g has been <strong>in</strong>stalled on 696 of 711 Tube platforms<br />

Successfully trialled ‘zero tolerance’ areas for advertis<strong>in</strong>g boards to reduce<br />

street clutter where demand for footways and pavement widths are<br />

constra<strong>in</strong>ed, provid<strong>in</strong>g a more accessible environment to all<br />

New tra<strong>in</strong>s on the District l<strong>in</strong>e, Circle, Hammersmith & City and Metropolitan<br />

l<strong>in</strong>es. These tra<strong>in</strong>s provide level access, wide doors, a ‘walk-through’ design to<br />

reduce overcrowd<strong>in</strong>g, dedicated wheelchair spaces, advanced audio and visual<br />

announcements and low floors<br />

Modification of the Emirates Air L<strong>in</strong>e cable car cab<strong>in</strong>s to allow motorised<br />

scooters on board (to a particular size)<br />

Host<strong>in</strong>g the first accessible transport exhibition, Access all Areas, to provide<br />

people with a range of transport <strong>in</strong>formation and give first-hand experience<br />

with full-scale mock-ups of Tube stations equipped with ramps and ‘talk<strong>in</strong>g’<br />

bollards which give directions to visually-impaired people. The event was free<br />

to attendees and follow<strong>in</strong>g its success will now be held biannually.<br />

These are some of the recent improvements that TfL has made. However there is<br />

more that we can and must do to respond to the needs of London’s <strong>diverse</strong> and<br />

grow<strong>in</strong>g population. We provide an annual progress report measured aga<strong>in</strong>st the<br />

S<strong>in</strong>gle Equality Scheme, demonstrat<strong>in</strong>g what we have achieved so far and the<br />

ways <strong>in</strong> which we cont<strong>in</strong>ue to develop <strong>our</strong> equality activities. The SES is updated<br />

every three to f<strong>our</strong> years to ensure that it cont<strong>in</strong>ues to align with customer and<br />

stakeholder requirements. It will next be published <strong>in</strong> 2016.<br />

Transport for London 12


Summary<br />

Profile of equality groups <strong>in</strong> London<br />

The 2011 Census recorded that there are 8,173,941 people who usually live <strong>in</strong><br />

London and this is set to grow <strong>in</strong> the com<strong>in</strong>g decades. London’s population is<br />

extremely <strong>diverse</strong> and ever-chang<strong>in</strong>g [2].<br />

BAME Londoners make up 40 per cent of the population [2]<br />

Half of Londoners are women (51 per cent) [2]<br />

Thirty-two per cent of Londoners are under the age of 25 and 11 per cent are<br />

aged 65 or over [2]<br />

Disabled Londoners make up 14 per cent of the population [2]<br />

Thirty-seven per cent of Londoners are liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> a household with an annual<br />

<strong>in</strong>come of less than £20,000 [12]<br />

The percentage of Londoners who consider themselves to be lesbian, gay or<br />

bisexual is 2. 5 per cent [13].<br />

There are differences <strong>in</strong> the profile of Londoners who make up each equality<br />

group:<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

Londoners liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> a lower <strong>in</strong>come household (less than £20,000 per year) and<br />

older Londoners (aged 65 or over) are more likely to be women [12]<br />

BAME Londoners are more likely to be younger, while women and those liv<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>in</strong> lower <strong>in</strong>come households are more likely to be older [2]<br />

Men are more likely than women, and white Londoners are more likely than<br />

BAME Londoners to be work<strong>in</strong>g, this may be l<strong>in</strong>ked <strong>in</strong> part to the different age<br />

profile of these equality groups [12]<br />

Note on data s<strong>our</strong>ces<br />

There are two ma<strong>in</strong> s<strong>our</strong>ces of demographic data used <strong>in</strong> this document: the Office for<br />

National Statistics Census <strong>in</strong>dicated with reference [2] and the London Travel Demand<br />

Survey <strong>in</strong>dicated with reference [12]. Where two s<strong>our</strong>ces exist, this report generally refers<br />

to the Census as this is considered the most robust s<strong>our</strong>ce of profile data due to the large<br />

sample size. There may be small differences observed <strong>in</strong> the specific proportions recorded.<br />

Transport for London 13


Please note that many of the groups <strong>in</strong> this report are <strong>in</strong>terrelated and therefore<br />

some of the differences observed are affected by differences <strong>in</strong> their demographic<br />

profile. For <strong>in</strong>stance, those people on low <strong>in</strong>comes are also more likely to be older<br />

people (23 per cent of those on low <strong>in</strong>come are also 65+; as shown <strong>in</strong> column D)<br />

and therefore they are less likely to use technology but are more likely to own a<br />

freedom pass. Another example is that BAME are more likely to be younger (36<br />

per cent of BAME Londoners are also aged 24 & under; as shown <strong>in</strong> column A) and<br />

are therefore more likely to use technology and to <strong>travel</strong> for education and are less<br />

likely to own a freedom pass. Disabled people are another example, as they are<br />

more likely to be older (44 per cent of disabled people are also over 65; as shown <strong>in</strong><br />

column E) and are also more likely to be on a low <strong>in</strong>come (69 per cent of disabled<br />

people are also on low <strong>in</strong>comes, as shown <strong>in</strong> column E).<br />

Overlap between groups: table show<strong>in</strong>g the proportion of each group across the top,<br />

made up by each group at the side<br />

Bold numbers are where a group has a higher proportion compared to other groups (For<br />

<strong>in</strong>stance 19% of 65+ are also BAME). (2013/14) [12]<br />

%<br />

A B C D E F<br />

BAME 65+ Aged 24<br />

& under<br />

Less<br />

than<br />

£20,000<br />

Disable<br />

d<br />

Women<br />

Base (5,563) (2,475) (4,220) (5,510) (1,821) (8,182)<br />

BAME 19% 47% 45% 30% 37%<br />

65+ 7% 23% 44% 13%<br />

Aged 24 & under 36% 31% 9% 28%<br />

Less than £20,000 43% 65% 41% 69% 40%<br />

Disabled 9% 37% 4% 20% 11%<br />

Women 51% 55% 49% 56% 56%<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five<br />

Transport for London 14


The follow<strong>in</strong>g table provides LTDS demographic data as this has the most directly comparable <strong>travel</strong> data by demographic profile<br />

of equality groups (2013/14) [12]<br />

Gender<br />

Age<br />

Ethnicity<br />

Household<br />

<strong>in</strong>come<br />

Work<strong>in</strong>g status<br />

(16+)<br />

Disabled<br />

(limit<strong>in</strong>g daily<br />

activity/ ability<br />

to <strong>travel</strong>)<br />

% All Men Women White BAME Aged 24 &<br />

under<br />

65+ Less than<br />

£20,000<br />

Disabled<br />

Nondisabled<br />

Base (15,700) (7,518) (8,182) (10,044) (5,563) (4,220) (2,475) (5,510) (1,821) (13,879)<br />

Men 49 - - 49 49 51 45 44 44 50<br />

Women 51 - - 51 51 49 55 56 56 50<br />

5-10 8 8 8 6 11 - - 9 2 9<br />

11-15 6 6 6 5 8 - - 7 2 6<br />

16-24 14 14 14 12 17 - - 15 5 15<br />

25-59 55 55 55 55 55 - - 41 38 57<br />

60-64 5 5 5 5 4 - - 4 9 4<br />

65-70 5 5 5 7 3 - - 8 11 5<br />

71-80 5 4 5 6 3 - - 9 17 3<br />

81+ 3 2 3 4 1 - - 6 16 1<br />

White 62 62 62 - - 52 81 55 69 61<br />

BAME 37 37 37 - - 47 19 45 30 38<br />

Less than £10,000 17 15 20 15 21 20 34 - 41 15<br />

£10,000–£19,999 19 17 20 17 22 21 31 - 28 18<br />

£20,000–£34,999 20 20 19 19 21 20 17 - 15 20<br />

£35,000–£49,999 13 14 13 14 13 12 7 - 6 14<br />

£50,000–£74,999 15 16 14 17 12 14 6 - 5 16<br />

£75,000+ 16 18 14 19 11 13 6 - 6 17<br />

Work<strong>in</strong>g full-time 40 45 32 50 42 24 5 15 8 52<br />

Work<strong>in</strong>g part-time 10 5 12 11 12 8 6 10 5 12<br />

Student 9 11 10 8 16 54 - 12 3 11<br />

Retired 13 13 17 18 9 - 86 24 48 11<br />

Not work<strong>in</strong>g 14 11 21 13 21 12 3 23 35 13<br />

Yes 11 9 11 12 9 4 37 20 - -<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five and work<strong>in</strong>g status does not <strong>in</strong>clude under 16s.<br />

Transport for London 15


Travel behavi<strong>our</strong><br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g is the most common form of public transport for all Londoners. Almost all<br />

Londoners walk every week (96 per cent). Disabled Londoners are less likely to walk at least<br />

weekly (78 per cent); almost all younger Londoners walk at least once a week <strong>in</strong> London (99<br />

per cent) [12].<br />

The bus is the next most commonly used type of transport <strong>in</strong> London: 61 per cent of<br />

Londoners use the bus at least once a week. Younger Londoners are the most likely equality<br />

group to use the bus at least weekly; 7 <strong>in</strong> 10 Londoners aged under 25 do so (71 per cent).<br />

Men and white Londoners are slightly less likely than average to use the bus once a week<br />

(58 per cent and 57 per cent respectively) [12].<br />

Disabled Londoners and Londoners over 65 years old use the UndergroundTube less than<br />

other groups on a weekly basis (16 per cent of disabled Londoners and 23 per cent of<br />

Londoners over 65; compared with 39 per cent of all Londoners) [12].<br />

Transport for London 16


Proportion of Londoners us<strong>in</strong>g modes of transport at least once a week (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All Men Women White BAME Aged 24<br />

& under<br />

65+ All less<br />

than<br />

£20,000<br />

Disabled<br />

Nondisabled<br />

Base (15,700) (7,518) (8,182) (10,044) (5,563) (4,220) (2,475) (5,510) (1,821) (14,114)<br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g 96 97 96 95 97 99 86 94 78 98<br />

Bus 61 58 65 57 68 71 61 70 56 62<br />

Car as passenger 48 42 55 47 50 66 45 44 47 48<br />

Car as driver 39 44 35 43 33 8 45 26 26 41<br />

Tube 39 42 35 40 37 33 23 31 16 41<br />

National Rail 17 19 15 19 14 13 11 11 8 18<br />

Overground 9 10 8 9 10 8 4 8 4 10<br />

Other taxi/m<strong>in</strong>icab<br />

6 6 6 6<br />

5<br />

8 6<br />

6<br />

6<br />

6<br />

(PHV)<br />

London taxi/ black cab 5 6 4 6 2 2 5 3 3 5<br />

DLR 4 5 4 3 6 4 2 4 4 5<br />

Tram 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 2<br />

Motorcycle 1 2 - 2 - - - 1 1 1<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Transport for London 17


Tickets and passes<br />

Oyster card ownership is related to age:<br />

<br />

<br />

Younger Londoners are the most likely equality group to hold an Oyster card: 75 per<br />

cent of 16 to 24-year-olds have one [12]<br />

Older people are least likely to hold an Oyster card: only six per cent of Londoners<br />

aged 65 or over have one. Most older Londoners (aged 65 or over) hold an older<br />

person’s Freedom Pass (92 per cent) and this accounts for the lower proportion of<br />

Oyster cards held <strong>in</strong> this group [12]<br />

Transport for London 18


Possession of an Oyster card or Freedom Pass (2013/14) [12]<br />

%<br />

All Men Women White BAME 16-24 65+ Income Disabled Nondisabled<br />


Barriers to public transport use<br />

The most commonly mentioned barrier to us<strong>in</strong>g public transport more often across all<br />

Londoners is overcrowded services, which is mentioned by 59 per cent of Londoners. 16<br />

to 24 year olds (65 per cent), BAME Londoners (64 per cent) and women (60 per cent) are<br />

the most likely equality groups to cite this barrier [14].<br />

Cost of tickets, safety and security issues and slow j<strong>our</strong>ney times are more commonly<br />

mentioned as barriers by some equality groups than across all Londoners.<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

Cost of tickets is more often mentioned as a barrier to public transport use by BAME<br />

Londoners (53 per cent) and younger Londoners (49 per cent aged between 16 and<br />

24) [14]<br />

Slow j<strong>our</strong>ney times is also one of the ma<strong>in</strong> barriers to public transport use mentioned<br />

(41 per cent of all Londoners). This is a particularly big barrier for younger Londoners<br />

aged between 16 and 24 and BAME Londoners (both 50 per cent)<br />

Concerns about antisocial behavi<strong>our</strong> and crime are particularly mentioned as barriers<br />

to public transport use by Londoners liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> DE households (social grade D refers to<br />

semi- and un-skilled manual workers and E refers to state pensioners, casual/lowest<br />

grade workers and unemployed Londoners) of whom 41 per cent say that concerns<br />

about antisocial behavi<strong>our</strong> affect their <strong>travel</strong> frequency, BAME Londoners (40 per<br />

cent), disabled Londoners (38 per cent) and women (38 per cent). The average among<br />

all Londoners is 34 per cent [14]<br />

Transport for London 20


Safety and security<br />

TfL uses a typology of worry to monitor the perceptions of Londoners with regard to<br />

their personal security while us<strong>in</strong>g public transport <strong>in</strong> London. The typology classifies<br />

people <strong>in</strong>to:<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

Unworried – reports no general worry and no episodes of recent worry<br />

Unexpressed fear – reports no general worry, but specific recent episodes<br />

Anxious – reports general worry, but no specific recent episodes<br />

Worried – reports general worry and specific recent episodes<br />

Don’t know<br />

Three-quarters of Londoners (75 per cent) fall <strong>in</strong>to the ‘unworried’ category. Londoners<br />

aged 65 or over are the most likely to be ‘unworried’ (83 per cent). LGB Londoners (69 per<br />

cent), BAME Londoners (70 per cent) and women (70 per cent) are the least likely to be<br />

‘unworried’ [14].<br />

Younger Londoners (65 per cent), BAME Londoners (62 per cent) and women (61 per<br />

cent) are the most likely to say that that their frequency of <strong>travel</strong> is affected ‘a lot’ or ‘a<br />

little’ because of concerns over crime or antisocial behavi<strong>our</strong> [14].<br />

The relationship between concerns around safety and security and equality groups is<br />

complex. For example, age, ethnicity, <strong>in</strong>come and whether a person is disabled are all<br />

likely to be <strong>in</strong>terrelated. Likewise the <strong>travel</strong> patterns, preferences and area <strong>in</strong> which<br />

someone lives also play a part.<br />

Access to <strong>in</strong>formation<br />

N<strong>in</strong>ety-two per cent of Londoners have access to the <strong>in</strong>ternet. Older Londoners who are<br />

aged 65 or over and disabled Londoners are least likely to have access to the <strong>in</strong>ternet (64<br />

per cent and 76 per cent access the <strong>in</strong>ternet respectively). Almost all young Londoners<br />

aged between 16 and 24 have <strong>in</strong>ternet access (99 per cent) [15].<br />

Nearly 4 out of 5 Londoners use a smartphone (77 per cent). Older Londoners (25 per<br />

cent) and disabled Londoners (44 per cent) are least likely to use smartphone. In<br />

comparison, almost all 16 to 24 year olds own or use a smartphone (96 per cent) [15].<br />

Nearly 4 <strong>in</strong> 5 Londoners (78 per cent) use the TfL website. This figure is lower among<br />

those over 65 and disabled Londoners (47 per cent and 54 per cent respectively).<br />

Younger Londoners are most likely to access the TfL website, with eighty-three per cent<br />

of Londoners aged 16-24 us<strong>in</strong>g it [15].<br />

Use of technology cont<strong>in</strong>ues to grow across all equality groups <strong>in</strong> terms of <strong>in</strong>ternet<br />

access, smartphone use and use of the TfL website. However, it is worth not<strong>in</strong>g that<br />

although there has been growth <strong>in</strong> technology use amongst older and disabled<br />

Londoners, use rema<strong>in</strong>s lower than for the overall population [15].<br />

Transport for London 21


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Summary: Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME)<br />

Londoners<br />

Key f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs<br />

BAME Londoners account for 40 per cent of the London population [2]<br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g is the most commonly used type of transport by BAME Londoners (97 per cent<br />

of BAME Londoners walk at least once a week compared with 95 per cent of white<br />

Londoners)<br />

After walk<strong>in</strong>g, the most commonly used type of transport by BAME Londoners is the<br />

bus (68 per cent BAME compared with 57 per cent white) [12]<br />

BAME Londoners cite a greater number of barriers to <strong>in</strong>creased public transport use<br />

than white Londoners [14]<br />

BAME Londoners are more likely to be classified as ‘worried’ and also slightly more<br />

likely to take precautions aga<strong>in</strong>st crime when <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g [14]<br />

In general BAME Londoners give slightly lower overall satisfaction rat<strong>in</strong>gs than white<br />

Londoners for most transport types. This is likely to be related to the younger age<br />

profile [16]<br />

Internet access is higher for BAME Londoners than white Londoners (96 per cent BAME<br />

compared with 91 per cent white). However, this difference is driven by the younger age<br />

profile of BAME Londoners. When look<strong>in</strong>g only at Londoners aged 16-64, there is no<br />

discernible difference <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>ternet access between BAME and white Londoners [15]<br />

Profile of BAME Londoners<br />

BAME Londoners account for 40 per cent of the London population. There are<br />

some demographic differences between BAME Londoners and white Londoners.<br />

Most notably, BAME Londoners have a much younger age profile than white<br />

Londoners. Forty-one per cent of BAME Londoners are aged 24 and under<br />

compared to 26 per cent of white Londoners [2].<br />

BAME Londoners are less likely than white Londoners to be <strong>in</strong> employment (57 per<br />

cent BAME compared with 64 per cent white) [2]. They are also more likely to live<br />

<strong>in</strong> households with an average annual <strong>in</strong>come below £20,000 (43 per cent BAME<br />

compared with 32 per cent white) [12].<br />

The majority of Londoners have English as their ma<strong>in</strong> language (78 per cent).<br />

However, f<strong>our</strong> per cent do not speak English well [2].<br />

Transport behavi<strong>our</strong><br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g is the most commonly used form of transport by BAME Londoners (97 per<br />

cent BAME compared with 95 per cent white). After walk<strong>in</strong>g, the bus is the most<br />

common type of transport used by BAME Londoners: 68 per cent of BAME<br />

Londoners use the bus at least once a week compared to 57 per cent of white<br />

Londoners.<br />

Among different BAME groups bus use varies: 77 per cent of black, 72 per cent of<br />

Londoners from an ‘other’ ethnic group, 70 per cent of mixed ethnic group<br />

Transport for London – Women 22


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Londoners and 61 per cent of Asian Londoners use the bus at least once a week<br />

[12].<br />

The use of cars among BAME Londoners is lower than for white Londoners; 33 per cent of<br />

BAME Londoners drive a car at least once a week compared to 43 per cent of white<br />

Londoners [12].<br />

Driv<strong>in</strong>g a car is higher among Asian Londoners compared to other BAME groups<br />

(39 per cent of Asian Londoners drive a car at least once a week compared with 28<br />

per cent of black Londoners) [12].<br />

Cycl<strong>in</strong>g levels of BAME Londoners and white Londoners are very similar. Eighteen<br />

per cent of BAME Londoners cycle <strong>in</strong> London at least sometimes compared to 17<br />

per cent of white Londoners [17].<br />

Barriers<br />

Compared to white Londoners, BAME Londoners are more likely to mention a<br />

larger number of potential barriers that prevent them from <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g their use of<br />

public transport [14].<br />

Cost is more of a barrier to <strong>in</strong>creased public transport use among BAME<br />

Londoners than white Londoners (53 per cent BAME compared with 40 per cent<br />

white) [14].<br />

Alongside cost, the barriers to greater public transport use most commonly<br />

mentioned by BAME Londoners are overcrowd<strong>in</strong>g (64 per cent), slow j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

times (50 per cent), unreliable services (43 per cent), concerns about antisocial<br />

behavi<strong>our</strong> (40 per cent) and dirty environments on the bus or tra<strong>in</strong> (39 per cent)<br />

[14].<br />

We use a typology of worry to assess Londoners’ attitudes to safety and security<br />

when us<strong>in</strong>g the public transport network. Most Londoners are classified as<br />

‘unworried’. BAME Londoners are less likely than white Londoners to be<br />

‘unworried’ (70 per cent BAME compared with 80 per cent white) and also more<br />

likely to be classified as ‘worried’ (seven per cent BAME compared with f<strong>our</strong> per<br />

cent white) [14].<br />

A slightly higher proportion of BAME Londoners than white Londoners take<br />

precautions aga<strong>in</strong>st crime when us<strong>in</strong>g public transport (40 per cent BAME<br />

compared with 38 per cent white). The most common precaution for BAME<br />

Londoners is to sit by other people (44 per cent), whereas for white Londoners it is<br />

to look after their belong<strong>in</strong>gs (36 per cent). [14].<br />

BAME Londoners, both adults and children, are almost twice as likely as white<br />

Londoners to be <strong>in</strong>jured on the roads [18]. BAME Londoners are less likely than<br />

white Londoners to say that they feel safe from road accidents when walk<strong>in</strong>g<br />

around London at night (60 per cent BAME compared with 74 per cent white) [19].<br />

Transport for London – Women 23


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Customer satisfaction<br />

BAME customers are slightly less satisfied with the transport they use than white<br />

customers. This applies to overall satisfaction, satisfaction with value for money<br />

and other attributes, and is relevant across most types of transport. This is likely to<br />

be related to the younger age profile of BAME Londoners.<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

BAME customers us<strong>in</strong>g the bus are slightly less satisfied overall than white<br />

customers (83 out of 100 BAME compared with 86 out of 100 white) [16]<br />

Satisfaction with value for money of bus <strong>travel</strong> among BAME customers has<br />

risen aga<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong> 2014/2015 to 70 out of 100 from 67 out of 100 <strong>in</strong> 2013/14, hav<strong>in</strong>g<br />

risen from 64 to 67 <strong>in</strong> 2012/ 2013. However, this rema<strong>in</strong>s slightly lower than<br />

among white customers (70 out 100 BAME compared with 74 out of 100 white)<br />

[16]<br />

Overall satisfaction with the Tube among BAME customers is also slightly<br />

lower than among white customers (83 out of 100 BAME compared with 85 out<br />

of 100 white) [16]<br />

Access to <strong>in</strong>formation<br />

A higher proportion of BAME Londoners have access to the <strong>in</strong>ternet than white<br />

Londoners (96 per cent BAME compared with 91 per cent white). This is almost<br />

entirely due to the older age profile of white Londoners, as the proportion of<br />

BAME and white Londoners aged between 16 and 64 who access the <strong>in</strong>ternet is<br />

very similar (98 per cent BAME 16-64 year olds compared with 96 per cent white<br />

16-64 year olds) [15].<br />

Both BAME and white 16 to 64-year-old Londoners tend to access the <strong>in</strong>ternet <strong>in</strong><br />

similar places.<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

N<strong>in</strong>ety-f<strong>our</strong> per cent of BAME and 95 per cent of white Londoners aged<br />

between 16 and 64 access the <strong>in</strong>ternet at home<br />

Sixty-eight per cent of BAME 16-64 year olds access the <strong>in</strong>ternet ‘on the move’<br />

compared with 70 per cent of white Londoners of this age<br />

Sixty-three per cent of BAME 16 to 64year olds access the <strong>in</strong>ternet at work,<br />

compared with sixty-six per cent of white Londoners [36].<br />

Transport for London – Women 24


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Introduction<br />

London is one of the most ethnically and culturally <strong>diverse</strong> cities <strong>in</strong> the world with<br />

black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people mak<strong>in</strong>g up 40 per cent of the city’s<br />

population [2]. More than 300 languages are spoken and multiple faiths are<br />

practised here [20].<br />

The age structure of BAME Londoners tends to be younger than white Londoners,<br />

and it is estimated that, by 2031, more than half of London’s 15 to 19 year olds will<br />

belong to a BAME group and the proportion of all Londoners from a BAME ethnic<br />

group will reach 51 per cent by 2041 [21].<br />

Our S<strong>in</strong>gle Equality Scheme addresses many of the issues identified <strong>in</strong> the<br />

research presented <strong>in</strong> this document [22].<br />

This chapter focuses on transport issues relevant to BAME Londoners. For the<br />

purposes of this section, Londoners are grouped accord<strong>in</strong>g to their reported<br />

ethnicity as follows:<br />

Breakdown of ethnic groups used <strong>in</strong> this report [12]<br />

Ethnic groups<br />

White English/Welsh/Scottish/Northern Irish<br />

White Irish<br />

Other white British<br />

Other white<br />

Black or black British – Caribbean<br />

Black or black British – African<br />

Black or black British – other black background<br />

Asian or Asian British – Indian<br />

Asian or Asian British – Pakistani<br />

Asian or Asian British – Bangladeshi<br />

Asian or Asian British – Ch<strong>in</strong>ese<br />

Asian or Asian British – other Asian background<br />

Mixed or multiple ethnic groups – white and black<br />

Caribbean<br />

Mixed or multiple ethnic groups – white and black<br />

African<br />

Mixed or multiple ethnic groups – white and Asian<br />

Other mixed or multiple ethnic background<br />

Other ethnic group – Arab<br />

Other ethnic group – any other<br />

White<br />

Black<br />

Asian<br />

Mixed<br />

Other<br />

White<br />

Black, Asian<br />

and m<strong>in</strong>ority<br />

ethnic (BAME)<br />

Transport for London – Women 25


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Profile of BAME Londoners<br />

Forty per cent of Londoners are from a BAME group [2]. This has <strong>in</strong>creased<br />

significantly s<strong>in</strong>ce 2001 when the comparative figure was 29 per cent and the<br />

proportion is forecast to <strong>in</strong>crease further <strong>in</strong> future [23]. Population projections<br />

suggest that the proportion of BAME Londoners will rise to 51 per cent by 2041<br />

[21].<br />

Ethnic groups <strong>in</strong> London from the ONS Census [2]<br />

% 2011 Census 2001 Census 1<br />

White 60 71<br />

BAME 40 29<br />

Black/African/Caribbean/black British 13 11<br />

Asian/Asian British 18 12<br />

Mixed/other 8 6<br />

We survey Londoners on an ongo<strong>in</strong>g basis as part of the London Travel Demand Survey.<br />

LTDS is a sample survey of Londoners and the equivalent figure from this survey is 62 per<br />

cent white and 37 per cent BAME [12].<br />

LTDS ethnic groups <strong>in</strong> London (2013/14) [12]<br />

% LTDS<br />

Base (15,700)<br />

White 62<br />

BAME 37<br />

Black 13<br />

Asian 18<br />

Mixed/other 6<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Where percentages do not add up to 100, this is due to round<strong>in</strong>g and refused codes.<br />

1 There is a slight change <strong>in</strong> the def<strong>in</strong>ition of ethnic groups between the 2001 and 2011 Census. See<br />

www.ons.gov.uk for details.<br />

Transport for London – Women 26


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

LTDS demographic profile of ethnic groups <strong>in</strong> London (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All White BAME Black Asian Mixed Other<br />

Base (15,700) (10,044) (5,563) (1,903) (2,785) (488) (387)<br />

Gender<br />

Men 49 49 49 47 51 47 47<br />

Women 51 51 51 53 49 53 53<br />

Age<br />

5-10 8 6 11 13 9 23 8<br />

11-15 6 5 8 8 6 13 7<br />

16-24 14 12 17 17 15 24 19<br />

25-59 55 55 55 53 59 37 55<br />

60-64 5 5 4 3 5 2 4<br />

65-70 5 7 3 2 3 1 4<br />

71-80 5 6 3 3 3 1 2<br />

81+ 3 4 1 1 1 - 1<br />

Household <strong>in</strong>come<br />

Less than £10,000 17 15 21 26 16 16 31<br />

£10,000–£19,999 19 17 22 27 18 23 27<br />

£20,000–£34,999 20 19 21 21 23 18 17<br />

£35,000–£49,999 13 14 13 12 14 11 12<br />

£50,000–£74,999 15 17 12 8 14 18 5<br />

£75,000+ 16 19 11 6 15 14 7<br />

Work<strong>in</strong>g status*<br />

Work<strong>in</strong>g full-time 47 50 42 39 45 41 31<br />

Work<strong>in</strong>g part-time 11 11 12 13 11 11 13<br />

Student 10 8 16 17 13 22 16<br />

Retired 15 18 9 9 10 3 7<br />

Not work<strong>in</strong>g 16 13 21 21 20 22 32<br />

Disabled<br />

Yes 11 12 9 10 8 5 11<br />

No 89 88 91 90 92 95 89<br />

Impairment affects <strong>travel</strong><br />

Yes 10 11 8 9 7 5 10<br />

No 90 89 92 91 93 95 90<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five and work<strong>in</strong>g status does not <strong>in</strong>clude under 16s. All TfL surveys use the<br />

Equality Act 2010 to def<strong>in</strong>e ‘disabled people’ as: ‘those who def<strong>in</strong>e themselves as hav<strong>in</strong>g a long-term physical or mental disability or health<br />

issue that impacts on their daily activities, the work they can do or limits their ability to <strong>travel</strong>’.<br />

Transport for London – Women 27


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

BAME Londoners tend to have a younger age profile than white Londoners. Fortyone<br />

per cent of BAME Londoners are under 25, compared to 26 per cent of white<br />

Londoners [2].<br />

Number of Londoners by ethnic group 2011 [2]<br />

This younger age profile of BAME Londoners has an impact on many of the <strong>travel</strong><br />

behavi<strong>our</strong>s covered <strong>in</strong> this chapter and should be kept <strong>in</strong> m<strong>in</strong>d when us<strong>in</strong>g the results.<br />

Transport for London – Women 28


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Employment and <strong>in</strong>come<br />

The Census data and LTDS show similar patterns <strong>in</strong> terms of employment and<br />

<strong>in</strong>come levels although the exact percentages do differ slightly. Accord<strong>in</strong>g to the<br />

Census, 57 per cent of BAME Londoners are <strong>in</strong> employment compared with 64 per<br />

cent of white Londoners aged 16 or over [2].<br />

More BAME Londoners are <strong>in</strong> education than white Londoners (the Census<br />

records 12 per cent BAME compared with five per cent white) [2].<br />

Reflect<strong>in</strong>g the older age profile, more white Londoners are retired than BAME<br />

Londoners (the Census records 8 per cent BAME compared with 17 per cent white)<br />

[2].<br />

2011 Census – Economic activity of Londoners (16 years old and over) [2]<br />

% White BAME<br />

Employed 64 57<br />

Unemployed 4 7<br />

Students (economically <strong>in</strong>active) 5 12<br />

Retired 17 8<br />

Long-term sick/disabled/other 6 8<br />

Look<strong>in</strong>g after home/family 4 7<br />

Students fall <strong>in</strong>to employed, unemployed and economically <strong>in</strong>active categories.<br />

Higher proportions of BAME Londoners have an annual household <strong>in</strong>come of<br />

below £20,000 (43 per cent) than white Londoners (32 per cent) [12].<br />

Transport for London – Women 29


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Languages spoken<br />

Twenty-two per cent of Londoners have a language other than English as their<br />

first language, with Polish (two per cent), Bengali (one per cent), Gujarati (one per<br />

cent), French (one per cent) and Urdu (one per cent) be<strong>in</strong>g the top five ma<strong>in</strong><br />

languages spoken [2]. This shows the wide range of languages used <strong>in</strong> London,<br />

and accord<strong>in</strong>g to the Greater London Authority (GLA) 300 languages are spoken<br />

across the city [24].<br />

European languages are spoken by 42 per cent of residents whose ma<strong>in</strong> language<br />

is not English, mak<strong>in</strong>g them the largest language group <strong>in</strong> London. South Asian<br />

languages are spoken by 29 per cent of people whose ma<strong>in</strong> language is not<br />

English. The rema<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g 29 per cent are split relatively equally among African (eight<br />

per cent), Middle Eastern which <strong>in</strong>cludes Turkish and Arabic (eight per cent), East<br />

Asian (seven per cent) and West/Central Asian languages (five per cent).<br />

Languages outside these groups, such as Caribbean Creole and sign language,<br />

account for the rema<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g one per cent [25].<br />

The 2011 Census revealed that f<strong>our</strong> per cent of Londoners have difficulty speak<strong>in</strong>g<br />

English. Difficulties speak<strong>in</strong>g English are more common among older Londoners.<br />

Two per cent of those aged between three and 15 do not speak English well<br />

compared with six per cent of 65 year olds and over.<br />

2011 Census – Londoners’ ability to speak English [2]<br />

% English is ma<strong>in</strong><br />

language<br />

English not ma<strong>in</strong><br />

language but spoken<br />

well<br />

English not spoken<br />

well<br />

All 78 18 4<br />

Age<br />

3-15 85 13 2<br />

16-24 79 19 2<br />

25-34 69 27 4<br />

35-49 74 21 5<br />

50-64 81 13 5<br />

65+ 86 8 6<br />

Transport for London – Women 30


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Religion and beliefs<br />

The 2011 Census shows that the representation of religion and beliefs of<br />

Londoners has changed over the last 10 years. There has been a decl<strong>in</strong>e <strong>in</strong> the<br />

proportion of Londoners consider<strong>in</strong>g themselves to be Christian (58 per cent to 48<br />

per cent), and there has also been an <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> the proportion who do not<br />

identify with any religion (16 per cent to 21 per cent) [2].<br />

The largest religious and faith groups <strong>in</strong> London are:<br />

Religions and faith groups <strong>in</strong> London [23, AB]<br />

% 2011 2001<br />

Christianity 48 58<br />

Islam 12 9<br />

H<strong>in</strong>duism 5 4<br />

Judaism 2 2<br />

Sikhism 2 2<br />

Buddhism 1 1<br />

Other 1 1<br />

Not religious 21 16<br />

Undeclared 8 9<br />

Religion varies considerably between ethnic groups:<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

While 28 per cent of white and 27 per cent of mixed Londoners report they<br />

have no religion, only seven per cent of black and eight per cent of Asian<br />

Londoners report this<br />

More than half of black (68 per cent) and white (57 per cent) Londoners report<br />

that they are Christian<br />

Asian Londoners and Londoners who have selected ‘other’ to describe their<br />

ethnic group are most likely to be Muslims (36 per cent of Asian Londoners and<br />

50 per cent of Londoners select<strong>in</strong>g ‘other’ ethnic group are Muslims)<br />

Religion by ethnic group [2]<br />

% White BAME Black Asian Mixed Other<br />

Christian 57 36 68 12 47 22<br />

Buddhist - 2 - 4 1 1<br />

H<strong>in</strong>du - 12 - 26 1 2<br />

Jewish 3 - - - 1 3<br />

Muslim 3 27 15 36 10 50<br />

Sikh - 4 - 7 - 4<br />

Other religion - 1 - 1 1 1<br />

No religion 28 10 7 8 27 10<br />

Religion not stated 9 8 9 6 12 9<br />

Transport for London – Women 31


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

London boroughs<br />

Some London boroughs have a higher proportion of BAME residents than others.<br />

Those with the largest proportion of BAME residents are:<br />

London boroughs with highest proportion of BAME residents [2]<br />

Borough<br />

% of BAME<br />

residents<br />

Newham 71<br />

Brent 64<br />

Harrow 58<br />

Redbridge 57<br />

Tower Hamlets 55<br />

The boroughs with the smallest proportion of BAME residents are:<br />

London boroughs with lowest proportion of BAME residents [2]<br />

Borough<br />

% of BAME<br />

residents<br />

Haver<strong>in</strong>g 12<br />

Richmond upon Thames 14<br />

Bromley 16<br />

Bexley 18<br />

Sutton 21<br />

There is a high concentration of BAME residents <strong>in</strong> the most deprived boroughs <strong>in</strong> London.<br />

Accord<strong>in</strong>g to Indices of Deprivation released by the ONS, the most deprived boroughs <strong>in</strong><br />

London are Hackney, Newham, Tower Hamlets and Isl<strong>in</strong>gton [26], all of which have large<br />

proportions of BAME residents.<br />

Transport for London – Women 32


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Travel behavi<strong>our</strong><br />

The average number of trips completed per weekday (among those <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g on<br />

any weekday) varies slightly accord<strong>in</strong>g to ethnicity. On average, BAME Londoners<br />

make 2.5 trips per weekday, compared to 2.8 trips made by white Londoners.<br />

Transport types used<br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g at least once a week is almost universal across all ethnic groups. After<br />

walk<strong>in</strong>g, the most commonly used types of transport for all Londoners are buses,<br />

cars (as both drivers and passengers) and the Tube [12].<br />

The proportion of Londoners us<strong>in</strong>g each type of transport at least once a week<br />

varies accord<strong>in</strong>g to ethnicity. BAME Londoners are more likely than white<br />

Londoners to use the bus at least once a week (68 per cent BAME compared with<br />

57 per cent white). In contrast, lower proportions of BAME Londoners <strong>travel</strong> at<br />

least once a week by car (as the driver), black cab and National Rail than white<br />

Londoners. Few differences are seen between white and BAME Londoners for<br />

their frequency of use of m<strong>in</strong>icabs, the Overground, trams and the Tube [12].<br />

Look<strong>in</strong>g specifically at the differences between ethnic m<strong>in</strong>ority groups, the use of<br />

buses is particularly high among black Londoners, with 77 per cent us<strong>in</strong>g this type<br />

of transport at least once a week, compared to 68 per cent of all BAME Londoners<br />

and 57 per cent of white Londoners) [12]. Research among BAME Londoners<br />

suggests this is because buses are seen to be cheaper than other transport options<br />

and have a more comprehensive route network [27].<br />

The use of cars (as the driver) tends to be higher among Asian Londoners than<br />

other BAME groups [12].<br />

Transport for London – Women 33


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Proportion of Londoners us<strong>in</strong>g types of transport at least once a week (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All White BAME Black Asian Mixed Other<br />

Base (15,700) (10,044) (5,563) (1,903) (2,785) (488) (387)<br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g 96 95 97 97 97 98 97<br />

Bus 61 57 68 77 61 70 72<br />

Car (as a passenger) 48 47 50 45 53 58 51<br />

Car (as a driver) 39 43 33 28 39 22 33<br />

Tube 39 40 37 34 37 35 46<br />

National Rail 17 19 14 16 12 18 9<br />

Overground 9 9 10 13 7 13 13<br />

Other taxi/m<strong>in</strong>icab<br />

6 6 6<br />

(PHV)<br />

8 4 6 5<br />

London taxi/black cab 5 6 2 1 3 3 5<br />

DLR 4 3 6 7 6 4 4<br />

Tram 2 2 2 3 1 2 -<br />

Motorbike 1 2 - - - - 1<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Where there is more detailed <strong>in</strong>formation on the use of <strong>in</strong>dividual types of<br />

transport, we have <strong>in</strong>cluded a sub-section below.<br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g<br />

There is little difference between the frequency of walk<strong>in</strong>g among BAME and<br />

white Londoners. N<strong>in</strong>ety-seven per cent of BAME Londoners walk at least once a<br />

week, which is very similar to white Londoners where 95 per cent walk at least<br />

once a week [12].<br />

BAME Londoners are slightly more likely than white Londoners to walk on a daily<br />

basis (85 per cent of BAME Londoners walk five or more days a week compared<br />

with 81 per cent of white Londoners) [12].<br />

Frequency of walk<strong>in</strong>g (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All White BAME Black Asian Mixed Other<br />

Base (15,700) (10,044) (5,563) (1,903) (2,785) (488) (387)<br />

5 or more days a<br />

week<br />

83 81 85 88 83 88 86<br />

3 or 4 days a week 6 7 5 4 6 4 6<br />

2 days a week 4 4 4 3 5 3 4<br />

1 day a week 3 3 3 3 3 2 2<br />

At least once a<br />

fortnight<br />

1 1 1 - 1 1 1<br />

At least once a<br />

month<br />

1 1 1 - 1 1 -<br />

At least once a year 1 1 1 1 1 1 1<br />

Not used <strong>in</strong> last year 1 2 1 1 1 - -<br />

Never used - - - - - - -<br />

Transport for London – Women 34


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Transport for London – Women 35


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

The purpose of j<strong>our</strong>neys made by walk<strong>in</strong>g varies between BAME and white<br />

Londoners:<br />

BAME Londoners are more likely than white Londoners to walk (at least once a<br />

week) to get to/from work, school or college (66 per cent BAME compared<br />

with 44 per cent white) and to take a child to school (29 per cent BAME<br />

compared with 12 per cent white)<br />

White Londoners are more likely than BAME Londoners to walk (at least once<br />

a week) to visit pubs/restaurants/c<strong>in</strong>emas and other social places (44 per cent<br />

BAME compared with 59 per cent white)<br />

BAME Londoners are slightly more likely to walk as part of a longer j<strong>our</strong>ney (79<br />

per cent BAME compared with 75 per cent white) [19]<br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g at least once a week by purpose of j<strong>our</strong>ney (2015) [19]<br />

% who walk at least once a week All White BAME<br />

Base (1,000) (731) (232)<br />

Walk…<br />

To complete small errands such as gett<strong>in</strong>g a 86 88 84<br />

newspaper or post<strong>in</strong>g a letter<br />

As part of a longer j<strong>our</strong>ney 77 75 79<br />

To visit pubs/restaurants/c<strong>in</strong>emas and other 53 59 44<br />

social places<br />

To get to work/school/college 52 44 66<br />

To visit friends and relatives 49 50 48<br />

To take a child to school 18 12 29<br />

Bus<br />

Bus use among BAME Londoners is higher than among white Londoners (68 per<br />

cent BAME compared with 57 per cent white Londoners us<strong>in</strong>g the bus at least once<br />

per week). The proportion of black Londoners us<strong>in</strong>g the bus at least once a week is<br />

77 per cent which is considerably higher than any other ethnic group (70 per cent<br />

of mixed Londoners and 61 per cent of Asian Londoners use the bus at least once a<br />

week) [12].<br />

The greater use of buses by BAME Londoners is also shown by compar<strong>in</strong>g data<br />

from the Bus User Survey (2014) aga<strong>in</strong>st the proportion of BAME Londoners <strong>in</strong> the<br />

population. Forty-seven per cent of day bus users and 46 per cent of night bus<br />

users are BAME customers, whereas BAME Londoners account for only 40 per<br />

cent of the total London population [28].<br />

Comparison of day and night bus users with London population (2014) [28, AB]<br />

% White BAME Black Asian Mixed<br />

All Londoners* [2] 60 40 8 18 13<br />

Transport for London – Women 36


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Day bus users 52 47 20 14 4<br />

Night bus users 54 46 17 13 5<br />

Table excludes under 16s.<br />

*Please note that figures for ‘All Londoners’ come from the 2011 Census.<br />

BAME bus users are as likely as white customers to take the bus to or from work<br />

dur<strong>in</strong>g the day (54 per cent of BAME bus users <strong>travel</strong> to or from work dur<strong>in</strong>g the<br />

day compared with 53 per cent of white bus users, and 52 per cent of BAME<br />

Londoners compared with 51 per cent white Londoners at night). A higher<br />

proportion of white Londoners <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g by bus at night are do<strong>in</strong>g so for leisure<br />

purposes compared to BAME bus users (17 per cent BAME compared with 27 per<br />

cent white). White bus users are also more likely to be <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g for leisure<br />

purposes dur<strong>in</strong>g the day (6 per cent BAME compared with 12 per cent white)<br />

although the difference is less marked than at night.<br />

Purpose of bus j<strong>our</strong>ney by ethnic group and time of day (2014) [28]<br />

Dur<strong>in</strong>g the day<br />

At night<br />

% White BAME White BAME<br />

Base (weighted) (17,221) (15,109) (4,192) (3,550)<br />

To/from or for work 53 54 51 52<br />

To/from<br />

4 10 2 5<br />

school/education<br />

To/from shopp<strong>in</strong>g 12 9 1 2<br />

Visit<strong>in</strong>g<br />

9 9 13 15<br />

friends/relatives<br />

Leisure 12 6 27 17<br />

Personal bus<strong>in</strong>ess 6 8 2 2<br />

Other purpose 3 4 5 6<br />

Transport for London – Women 37


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Black Londoners are the most likely ethnic group to use a bus on a daily basis: 46<br />

per cent of black Londoners do so compared with 28 per cent of all Londoners<br />

[12].<br />

Frequency of <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g by bus (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All White BAME Black Asian Mixed Other<br />

Base (15,700) (10,044) (5,563) (1,903) (2,785) (488) (387)<br />

5 or more days a week 28 23 36 46 29 37 39<br />

3 or 4 days a week 12 12 13 13 12 12 16<br />

2 days a week 11 11 11 10 10 12 10<br />

1 day a week 10 10 9 8 9 9 7<br />

At least once a<br />

fortnight<br />

5 6 4 3 5 3 5<br />

At least once a month 10 10 8 6 10 8 8<br />

At least once a year 14 15 12 9 15 12 7<br />

Not used <strong>in</strong> last year 7 9 5 3 7 4 4<br />

Never used 2 2 2 1 3 2 4<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Car<br />

BAME Londoners are less likely to hold a driv<strong>in</strong>g licence than white Londoners (54<br />

per cent BAME aged 17 years or over compared with 69 per cent white). Asian<br />

Londoners are slightly more likely than other BAME groups to hold a driv<strong>in</strong>g<br />

licence (58 per cent).<br />

The frequency with which people drive a car varies across BAME groups – 39 per<br />

cent of Asian Londoners aged 17 years or over drive at least once a week<br />

compared to 28 per cent of black Londoners and 22 per cent of mixed Londoners<br />

[12].<br />

Proportion of Londoners (aged 17+) with a full car driv<strong>in</strong>g licence (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All White BAME Black Asian Mixed Other<br />

Base (13,127) (8,742) (4,315) (1,456) (2,277) (274) (308)<br />

Holds a full car driv<strong>in</strong>g 64 69 54 49 58 55 54<br />

licence<br />

Note that this table <strong>in</strong>cludes all Londoners aged 17 and over.<br />

Transport for London – Women 38


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

BAME Londoners are less likely than white Londoners to live <strong>in</strong> a household that<br />

owns or has access to a car (63 per cent BAME compared with 67 per cent white).<br />

There are some big differences between BAME groups, with Asian Londoners<br />

be<strong>in</strong>g the most likely to own or have access to a car (72 per cent) compared with 52<br />

per cent of black Londoners and 60 per cent of mixed Londoners [12].<br />

Proportion of Londoners <strong>in</strong> a household with access to a car (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All White BAME Black Asian Mixed Other<br />

Base (15,700) (10,044) (5,563) (1,903) (2,785) (488) (387)<br />

0 cars 35 33 37 48 28 40 37<br />

1 car 46 46 45 41 47 45 54<br />

2+ cars 20 21 18 11 25 15 10<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Tube<br />

Tube use among BAME Londoners is slightly lower than among white Londoners<br />

(37 per cent of BAME Londoners use the Tube at least once a week compared to<br />

40 per cent white). When look<strong>in</strong>g at <strong>in</strong>dividual BAME groups there is very little<br />

difference [12].<br />

Frequency of <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g by Tube (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All White BAME Black Asian Mixed Other<br />

Base (15,700) (10,044) (5,563) (1,903) (2,785) (488) (387)<br />

5 or more days a week 15 16 14 12 16 11 14<br />

3 or 4 days a week 7 7 6 6 6 5 11<br />

2 days a week 8 8 7 6 8 7 12<br />

1 day a week 9 9 9 10 8 12 10<br />

At least once a fortnight 8 8 8 7 8 9 6<br />

At least once a month 15 14 15 16 15 13 14<br />

At least once a year 25 23 28 29 27 32 21<br />

Not used <strong>in</strong> last year 11 12 9 10 9 8 8<br />

Never used 3 3 4 4 4 2 5<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Transport for London – Women 39


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Cycl<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Cycl<strong>in</strong>g levels among BAME Londoners and white Londoners are very similar.<br />

Eighteen per cent of BAME Londoners cycle <strong>in</strong> London at least sometimes,<br />

compared with 17 per cent of white Londoners.<br />

Proportion of Londoners who cycle (November 2014) [17]<br />

% All White BAME<br />

Base (2,192) (1,521) (671)<br />

Cyclist (sometimes uses a bike to get<br />

17 17 18<br />

around London)<br />

Non-cyclist (never uses a bike to get<br />

around London)<br />

83 83 82<br />

There is also very little difference between white and BAME Londoners <strong>in</strong><br />

frequency of cycl<strong>in</strong>g (at least once a week) <strong>in</strong> London (14 per cent BAME<br />

compared with 13 per cent white) [17].<br />

Frequency of <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g by bicycle (November 2014) [17]<br />

% All White BAME<br />

Base (2,192) (1,521) (671)<br />

5 or more days a week 4 4 3<br />

3 or 4 days a week 5 4 5<br />

2 days a week 3 3 3<br />

1 day a week 2 2 3<br />

At least once a fortnight 1 1 1<br />

At least once a month 1 1 -<br />

At least once a year 2 2 2<br />

Not used <strong>in</strong> last year - - -<br />

Never used 83 83 82<br />

Most Londoners, regardless of whether they cycle currently, know how to ride a<br />

bike. There is little difference between white and BAME Londoners <strong>in</strong> their ability<br />

to ride a bike (83 per cent BAME compared with 84 per cent white) [17].<br />

Proportion of Londoners able to ride a bike (November 2014) [17]<br />

% All White BAME<br />

Base (2,192) (1,521) (671)<br />

Can ride a bike 83 84 83<br />

Cannot ride a bike 17 16 17<br />

Transport for London – Women 40


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

TfL has developed a behavi<strong>our</strong>al change model to look at Londoners’ read<strong>in</strong>ess to<br />

cycle or cycle more if they already cycle around the city. Accord<strong>in</strong>g to this model,<br />

white Londoners are more likely to be <strong>in</strong> the pre-contemplation stage, mean<strong>in</strong>g<br />

that they haven’t thought about cycl<strong>in</strong>g (more) or that they have thought about it,<br />

but do not <strong>in</strong>tend to do so (63 per cent of BAME and 72 per cent of white<br />

Londoners) [17].<br />

Behavi<strong>our</strong> change model of cycl<strong>in</strong>g (November 2014) [17]<br />

% All White BAME<br />

Base (2,192) (1,521) (671)<br />

Pre-contemplation:<br />

69 72 63<br />

’You have thought about it but would be unlikely<br />

to start <strong>in</strong> the future’<br />

‘You have thought about it but don’t <strong>in</strong>tend<br />

start<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the future’<br />

‘You have never thought of start<strong>in</strong>g but could be<br />

open to it <strong>in</strong> the future’<br />

Contemplation:<br />

10 8 12<br />

‘You are th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g about start<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the future’<br />

Preparation:<br />

3 2 4<br />

‘You have decided to start soon’<br />

Change:<br />

2 1 3<br />

‘You have tried to start recently but are f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g it<br />

difficult’<br />

‘You have started recently and are f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g it quite<br />

easy so far’<br />

Susta<strong>in</strong>ed change:<br />

10 11 9<br />

‘You started a while ago and are still do<strong>in</strong>g it<br />

occasionally’<br />

You started a while ago and are still do<strong>in</strong>g it<br />

regularly’<br />

Lapsed:<br />

‘You had started do<strong>in</strong>g this but couldn’t stick to it’<br />

6 5 8<br />

Cycl<strong>in</strong>g schemes<br />

Awareness of Cycle Hire is relatively high among all Londoners. However, BAME<br />

Londoners are less likely than white Londoners to be aware (88 per cent BAME<br />

compared with 93 per cent white).<br />

Twenty one per cent of BAME Londoners have hired a bicycle through the scheme<br />

compared with 15 per cent of white Londoners [17].<br />

Seventeen per cent of casual Cycle Hire users (def<strong>in</strong>ed as not hav<strong>in</strong>g a Cycle Hire<br />

membership key) are BAME customers and 7 per cent of Cycle Hire members are<br />

BAME customers [29].<br />

Transport for London – Women 41


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Thirty seven per cent of BAME Londoners report that they will def<strong>in</strong>itely/ probably<br />

use the scheme <strong>in</strong> the next year compared with 22 per cent of white Londoners.<br />

[17]<br />

Expected use of Cycle Hire <strong>in</strong> the future (November 2014) [17]<br />

% All White BAME<br />

Base (1,180) (833) (347)<br />

Yes, def<strong>in</strong>itely/probably 27 22 37<br />

Yes, def<strong>in</strong>itely 9 7 13<br />

Yes, probably 18 15 24<br />

No, probably not 30 33 22<br />

No, def<strong>in</strong>itely not 33 36 27<br />

Not sure 10 9 13<br />

Across all ethnic groups, awareness of Cycle Superhighways is lower than for Cycle<br />

Hire. In particular, BAME Londoners are less likely to be aware of Cycle<br />

Superhighways: 53 per cent are aware compared to 65 per cent of white<br />

Londoners [17].<br />

The same proportion of BAME Londoners and white Londoners report that they<br />

have used a Cycle Superhighway (10 per cent). BAME Londoners are aga<strong>in</strong> more<br />

likely than white Londoners to say they will def<strong>in</strong>itely/ probably use the<br />

Superhighways <strong>in</strong> the future (28 per cent BAME compared with 21 per cent) [17].<br />

Expected use of Cycle Superhighways <strong>in</strong> the future (November 2014) [17]<br />

% All White BAME<br />

Base (1,180) (833) (347)<br />

Yes, def<strong>in</strong>itely/ probably 23 21 28<br />

Yes, def<strong>in</strong>itely 6 6 7<br />

Yes, probably 17 15 21<br />

No, probably not 28 29 26<br />

No, def<strong>in</strong>itely not 31 34 26<br />

Not sure 17 16 20<br />

Transport for London – Women 42


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Dial-a-Ride<br />

Thirty-five per cent of Dial-a-Ride members are BAME compared with 65 per cent<br />

who are white. The proportion of BAME Dial-a-Ride members decreases as the<br />

age of the member <strong>in</strong>creases: 18 per cent of Dial-a-Ride members who are aged<br />

90 or over are BAME [30].<br />

Dial-a-Ride (DaR) membership by ethnicity (2014) [2,30]<br />

% All disabled DaR 65-79 years 80-89 years 90+ years old<br />

Londoners members<br />

old<br />

old-<br />

Base (excludes<br />

- (41,270) (10,312) (15,117) (8,144)<br />

unknown data)<br />

White 66 65 55 71 82<br />

BAME 34 35 45 29 18<br />

English is spoken by 94 per cent of Dial-a-Ride members. Gujarati and Punjabi are<br />

the most common languages spoken by non-English speak<strong>in</strong>g members [30].<br />

J<strong>our</strong>ney purpose<br />

Across all <strong>travel</strong> <strong>in</strong> London, the purpose of j<strong>our</strong>neys varies slightly by ethnicity,<br />

especially between the ethnicity groups which make up BAME Londoners. BAME<br />

Londoners are generally more likely than white Londoners to <strong>travel</strong> by public<br />

transport for reasons relat<strong>in</strong>g to education, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g escort<strong>in</strong>g children to school<br />

(26 per cent BAME compared with 15 per cent white). BAME Londoners are less<br />

likely than white Londoners to use public transport dur<strong>in</strong>g the week for leisure<br />

purposes (18 per cent BAME compared with 26 per cent white); this may be<br />

related to the younger age profile of BAME Londoners, as younger people tend to<br />

make fewer leisure trips on weekdays [12].<br />

Weekday j<strong>our</strong>ney purpose (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All White BAME Black Asian Mixed Other<br />

Base – all trips by (40,159) (27,071) (12,900) (4,492) (6,355) (1,245) (808)<br />

Londoners<br />

Shopp<strong>in</strong>g/personal 24 25 24 25 22 23 31<br />

bus<strong>in</strong>ess<br />

Usual workplace 20 20 20 17 25 9 12<br />

Leisure 23 26 18 17 16 22 22<br />

Education 19 15 26 26 24 32 26<br />

Other work-related 8 9 6 8 4 7 6<br />

Other 6 6 7 6 8 8 3<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Asian Londoners are the most likely of all ethnic groups to be mak<strong>in</strong>g weekday<br />

j<strong>our</strong>neys to their usual workplace (25 per cent) and least likely to be mak<strong>in</strong>g<br />

j<strong>our</strong>neys for leisure (16 per cent) [12].<br />

Transport for London – Women 43


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Ticket types<br />

Oyster pay as you go (PAYG) is the most common ticket type used by Londoners<br />

on all types of public transport, regardless of ethnic group. Oyster PAYG is used by<br />

a higher proportion of BAME Londoners than white Londoners. Sixty-five per cent<br />

of BAME Londoners use Oyster PAYG, compared to 55 per cent of white<br />

Londoners. This pattern is the same for Oyster season tickets, which are used by a<br />

higher proportion of BAME Londoners than white Londoners (27 per cent for<br />

BAME Londoners compared with 15 per cent for white Londoners) [32].<br />

BAME Londoners are much less likely to use a Freedom Pass to <strong>travel</strong> on public<br />

transport than white Londoners [32].<br />

These f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs are likely to be related to the younger age profile of BAME<br />

Londoners.<br />

Tickets and passes used on public transport (January 2015) [32]<br />

%<br />

Base: Public transport users:<br />

All<br />

(975)<br />

White<br />

(687)<br />

BAME<br />

(239)<br />

Freedom Pass 21 29 7<br />

Oyster PAYG 58 55 65<br />

Oyster Season ticket 20 15 27<br />

Contactless payment 16 16 17<br />

Cash/s<strong>in</strong>gle/return 10 10 12<br />

Any other Travelcard 7 7 7<br />

Oyster card<br />

A slightly higher proportion of BAME Londoners hold an Oyster card than white<br />

Londoners. Mixed Londoners are the least likely to hold an Oyster card (52 per<br />

cent) [12].<br />

Possession of an Oyster card (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All White BAME Black Asian Mixed Other<br />

Base (15,700) (10,044) (5,563) (1,903) (2,785) (488) (387)<br />

Have an Oyster<br />

60 59 61 61 63 52 62<br />

card<br />

Do not have an<br />

Oyster card<br />

40 41 39 39 37 48 38<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Note that Oyster card ownership excludes Freedom Passes, Oyster photocards and Zip cards.<br />

Transport for London – Women 44


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Freedom Pass<br />

N<strong>in</strong>eteen per cent of white Londoners have Freedom Passes compared with n<strong>in</strong>e<br />

per cent of BAME Londoners. These differences are largely l<strong>in</strong>ked to the differ<strong>in</strong>g<br />

age profile of BAME and white Londoners. The proportion of BAME and white<br />

Londoners aged 65 and over who hold a Freedom Pass is the same: 92 per cent of<br />

both BAME and white Londoners aged 65 or over hold a Freedom Pass [12].<br />

Freedom Passes held (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All White BAME Black Asian Mixed Other<br />

Base (15,700) (10,044) (5,563) (1,903) (2,785) (488) (387)<br />

Older person’s<br />

Freedom pass<br />

15 19 9 8 10 3 8<br />

Disabled person’s<br />

Freedom pass<br />

2 2 2 3 2 2 3<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Transport for London – Women 45


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Barriers<br />

Barriers to greater public transport use<br />

We have carried out several research programmes to <strong>in</strong>vestigate the barriers that<br />

Londoners face when us<strong>in</strong>g public transport. The f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs from each of these<br />

studies are <strong>in</strong> general agreement. However, it is worth not<strong>in</strong>g that the issue of<br />

barriers is complex and the specific questions that Londoners were asked may<br />

have had an impact upon the responses that people gave. The impact of specific<br />

barriers may also be much more significant for some Londoners than others.<br />

BAME Londoners cite a greater number of barriers to <strong>in</strong>creased public transport<br />

use than white Londoners. The barriers to greater public transport use that are<br />

most commonly mentioned by BAME Londoners are overcrowded services (64 per<br />

cent BAME compared with 56 per cent white), cost of tickets (53 per cent BAME<br />

compared with 40 per cent white), slow j<strong>our</strong>ney times (50 per cent BAME<br />

compared with 36 per cent white), and unreliable services (43 per cent BAME<br />

compared with 33 per cent white) [14].<br />

For all potential barriers put to Londoners (<strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g concerns about antisocial<br />

behavi<strong>our</strong>, fear of crime and a lack of <strong>in</strong>formation on how to use public transport)<br />

a greater proportion of BAME Londoners than white Londoners cite these as<br />

potentially stopp<strong>in</strong>g them from us<strong>in</strong>g public transport more often [14].<br />

Barriers to us<strong>in</strong>g public transport more often (prompted) (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]<br />

% All White BAME<br />

Base (4,005) (3,039) (791)<br />

Overcrowded services 59 56 64<br />

Cost of tickets 45 40 53<br />

Slow j<strong>our</strong>ney times 41 36 50<br />

Unreliable services 37 33 43<br />

Concern about antisocial behavi<strong>our</strong> 34 31 40<br />

Dirty environment on the bus/tra<strong>in</strong> 28 21 39<br />

Fear of crime gett<strong>in</strong>g to/ wait<strong>in</strong>g for the<br />

bus/tra<strong>in</strong><br />

24 19 32<br />

Fear of crime on the bus/tra<strong>in</strong> 23 18 30<br />

Fear about knife crime 20 16 27<br />

Dirty environment gett<strong>in</strong>g to the bus/tra<strong>in</strong> 18 12 27<br />

Fear of terrorist attacks 12 9 17<br />

Graffiti 10 8 13<br />

Lack of <strong>in</strong>formation on how to use public<br />

transport<br />

10 9 12<br />

Risk of accidents 9 6 12<br />

Don’t understand how to buy bus tickets 5 5 6<br />

None of these 17 20 12<br />

Transport for London – Women 46


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Safety and security<br />

TfL uses a typology of worry to monitor the perceptions of Londoners with regard<br />

to their personal security while us<strong>in</strong>g public transport <strong>in</strong> London. The typology<br />

classifies people <strong>in</strong>to:<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

Unworried – reports no general worry and no episodes of recent worry<br />

Unexpressed fear – reports no general worry, but specific recent episodes<br />

Anxious – reports general worry, but no specific recent episodes<br />

Worried – reports general worry, and specific recent episodes<br />

Don’t know<br />

The majority of Londoners fall <strong>in</strong>to the ‘unworried’ category which means that<br />

they are generally unworried about their personal security <strong>in</strong> London and have<br />

experienced no <strong>in</strong>cidents to make them feel worried <strong>in</strong> the last three months. A<br />

significantly lower proportion of BAME Londoners are considered ‘unworried’ than<br />

white Londoners (70 per cent of BAME Londoners are ‘unworried’ compared with<br />

80 per cent of white Londoners). As with many other f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>in</strong> this report, this<br />

may be related to the younger age profile of BAME Londoners [14].<br />

Typology of worry (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]<br />

% White BAME<br />

Base (3,039) (791)<br />

Unworried 80 70<br />

Unexpressed 10 14<br />

Anxious 4 8<br />

Worried 4 7<br />

Don’t know 2 2<br />

Transport for London – Women 47


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

BAME Londoners are also considerably less likely than white Londoners to say<br />

that they are ‘not at all worried’ about personal security while us<strong>in</strong>g public<br />

transport <strong>in</strong> London (35 per cent BAME compared with 47 per cent white) and are<br />

more likely to report that they are ‘very worried’ (f<strong>our</strong> per cent BAME compared<br />

with two per cent white) [14].<br />

Levels of concern about personal security when us<strong>in</strong>g public transport <strong>in</strong> London (Jan/<br />

Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]<br />

% White BAME<br />

Base (3,039) (791)<br />

Not at all worried 47 35<br />

A little bit worried 43 49<br />

Quite a bit worried 7 10<br />

Very worried 2 4<br />

Don’t know 1 1<br />

Among Londoners who are worried about their personal security when us<strong>in</strong>g<br />

public transport <strong>in</strong> London, BAME Londoners are more likely than white<br />

Londoners to say that this worry reduces their quality of life ‘very much’ (15 per<br />

cent BAME Londoners experience this level of worry compared with 11 per cent<br />

white Londoners) [14].<br />

Extent to which worry about personal security when us<strong>in</strong>g public transport reduces quality<br />

of life (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]<br />

% White BAME<br />

Base (all worried about personal safety) (301) (127)<br />

Not at all 20 17<br />

A little 30 28<br />

Moderately 18 19<br />

Quite a bit 19 20<br />

Very much 11 15<br />

Don’t know 2 -<br />

Net: Quite a bit/very much 30 35<br />

A slightly higher proportion of BAME Londoners than white Londoners take<br />

precautions aga<strong>in</strong>st crime when us<strong>in</strong>g public transport (40 per cent BAME<br />

compared with 38 per cent white). The most common precaution for BAME<br />

Londoners is to sit by other people, whereas for white Londoners it is to look after<br />

their belong<strong>in</strong>gs. For BAME Londoners the next most common precaution is to<br />

<strong>travel</strong> with someone else, while for white Londoners the second most common<br />

precaution is to sit near other people [14].<br />

Transport for London – Women 48


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Precautions taken (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]<br />

% All White BAME<br />

Base (all who take precautions) (1,507) (1,130) (322)<br />

Sat near to other people 34 29 44<br />

Looked after my belong<strong>in</strong>gs 29 36 18<br />

Travelled with someone else 23 20 29<br />

Travelled at a different time of day 16 13 21<br />

Used a different route 15 11 22<br />

Stayed aware/vigilant 15 15 15<br />

Avoided us<strong>in</strong>g that transport type 12 11 15<br />

Only took necessities with me 3 3 3<br />

Carried a personal alarm 3 3 3<br />

Note responses 2% or below among all Londoners not shown.<br />

In terms of actual experiences, the proportion of BAME Londoners who have felt<br />

worried about their personal security when us<strong>in</strong>g public transport <strong>in</strong> London <strong>in</strong> the<br />

past three months is higher than white Londoners (20 per cent BAME compared<br />

with 14 per cent white). There is little difference as to whether the last worry<strong>in</strong>g<br />

episode was dur<strong>in</strong>g the day or at night between BAME and white Londoners: 38<br />

per cent of the most recent worry<strong>in</strong>g episodes mentioned by BAME Londoners<br />

occurred dur<strong>in</strong>g the day compared with 42 per cent of episodes mentioned by<br />

white Londoners (this difference is not statistically significant) [14].<br />

We asked those who have felt worried about their personal security when us<strong>in</strong>g<br />

public transport <strong>in</strong> the last three months on which type of transport they<br />

experienced this event. There is little difference <strong>in</strong> the proportion of worry<strong>in</strong>g<br />

events by transport type between BAME and white Londoners. Buses were the<br />

most likely type of transport on which theses events occurred (52 per cent of<br />

BAME Londoners who have felt worried <strong>in</strong> the last three months were on the bus)<br />

[14].<br />

Crime and antisocial behavi<strong>our</strong> concerns affect the frequency of <strong>travel</strong> on the<br />

Tube, bus and National Rail ‘a little’ or ‘a lot’ for slightly more than half of<br />

Londoners (53 per cent). BAME Londoners are affected to a greater extent than<br />

white Londoners: 62 per cent of BAME Londoners report that the frequency with<br />

which they use public transport is affected ‘a lot’ or ‘a little’ because of concerns<br />

over crime or antisocial behavi<strong>our</strong> compared with 47 per cent of white Londoners<br />

[14].<br />

Transport for London – Women 49


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

A higher proportion of BAME Londoners are affected <strong>in</strong> terms of their public<br />

transport <strong>travel</strong> frequency because of these concerns across all three forms of<br />

transport (Tube, bus, National Rail) both dur<strong>in</strong>g the day and at night [14].<br />

Proportion of Londoners for whom concerns over crime/antisocial behavi<strong>our</strong> affect the<br />

frequency of their public transport use ‘a lot/a little’ (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]<br />

% All White BAME<br />

Base (4,005) (3,039) (791)<br />

Overall: Dur<strong>in</strong>g the day/after dark<br />

Underground/buses/National Rail 53 48 62<br />

Dur<strong>in</strong>g the day:<br />

Underground/buses/National Rail 23 17 31<br />

Underground 16 11 23<br />

Buses 17 13 24<br />

National Rail 11 8 15<br />

After dark:<br />

Underground/buses/National Rail 48 44 56<br />

Underground 37 31 46<br />

Buses 42 38 50<br />

National Rail 29 26 36<br />

We recently conducted a trial on the number 25 bus route which showed that<br />

<strong>in</strong>tervention can make customers feel safer. This <strong>in</strong>tervention (which <strong>in</strong>cluded<br />

regular patrols on the route by the Safer Transport Team, by community officers<br />

and Revenue Protection Inspectors) led to an <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> the proportion of<br />

customers who felt ‘unworried’ when <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g on the route (87 per cent<br />

compared with 77 per cent before the <strong>in</strong>tervention). BAME customers were more<br />

likely to feel ‘unworried’ than white customers as a result of the <strong>in</strong>tervention (88<br />

per cent BAME compared with 85 per cent white) [33]<br />

Transport for London – Women 50


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Road traffic <strong>in</strong>juries<br />

BAME Londoners are less likely than white Londoners to say that they feel safe<br />

from road accidents when walk<strong>in</strong>g around London either dur<strong>in</strong>g the day or at<br />

night. Thirty-seven per cent of white Londoners compared to 31 per cent of BAME<br />

Londoners consider themselves very safe from road accidents when walk<strong>in</strong>g<br />

around London dur<strong>in</strong>g the day, and 23 per cent of white Londoners compared to<br />

20 per cent of BAME Londoners consider themselves very safe from road<br />

accidents when walk<strong>in</strong>g around London at night [19].<br />

Feel<strong>in</strong>gs of safety from road accidents when walk<strong>in</strong>g around London (2015) [19]<br />

% All White BAME<br />

Base (1,000) (731) (232)<br />

Dur<strong>in</strong>g the day:<br />

Very safe 34 37 31<br />

Quite safe 51 50 54<br />

Not very safe 9 9 11<br />

Not at all safe 2 2 3<br />

Dur<strong>in</strong>g the night:<br />

Very safe 22 23 20<br />

Quite safe 46 51 40<br />

Not very safe 17 13 25<br />

Not at all safe 8 6 11<br />

Transport for London – Women 51


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Differences exist between ethnic groups <strong>in</strong> terms of <strong>in</strong>jury rates from road traffic<br />

accidents (this refers to <strong>in</strong>juries susta<strong>in</strong>ed by any road users, so it <strong>in</strong>cludes<br />

pedestrians, cyclists and car occupants). For both children and adults, road traffic<br />

<strong>in</strong>jury rates are higher among black Londoners compared to white and Asian<br />

Londoners. Black adults are 1.36 times more likely to be <strong>in</strong>jured on the roads than<br />

white adults and 1.32 times more likely to be <strong>in</strong>jured than Asian adults. A similar<br />

pattern is seen for children [31].<br />

Average annual <strong>in</strong>jury rates per 100,000 for all transportation types (2007–2011) [31]<br />

Average rate/100,000 people White BAME<br />

Adults 237 460<br />

Children 84 154<br />

There is some uncerta<strong>in</strong>ty as to why these differences <strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>jury rates exist. Some of<br />

the variation is thought to be expla<strong>in</strong>ed by the association between <strong>in</strong>jury rates<br />

and deprivation. However, this explanation is not thought to account for all of the<br />

variation seen, especially among black Londoners, where research from 2007<br />

found the relationship between <strong>in</strong>jury rates and deprivation to be unclear [31].<br />

Child pedestrian <strong>in</strong>juries<br />

BAME children, especially children from black backgrounds, are more likely than<br />

white children to be <strong>in</strong>jured or killed <strong>in</strong> road accidents <strong>in</strong> London [23]. Black boys <strong>in</strong><br />

particular have higher pedestrian <strong>in</strong>jury rates than black girls [31].<br />

Average annual pedestrian <strong>in</strong>jury rates <strong>in</strong> London per 100,000 people (1996–2006) [31]<br />

Average<br />

Gender White Black Asian<br />

rate/100,000 people<br />

Age group<br />

0-4 Boys 45 95 68<br />

Girls 29 52 41<br />

5-9 Boys 125 235 141<br />

Girls 72 135 69<br />

10-14 Boys 254 313 136<br />

Girls 179 255 97<br />

15-24 Boys/Men 144 164 84<br />

Girls/Women 122 148 69<br />

Transport for London – Women 52


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Customer satisfaction<br />

Overall satisfaction<br />

We measure overall satisfaction with various transport types <strong>in</strong> London on an 11-<br />

po<strong>in</strong>t scale, with 10 represent<strong>in</strong>g extremely satisfied and zero represent<strong>in</strong>g<br />

extremely dissatisfied. We then scale this up to 100.<br />

We have standardised satisfaction rat<strong>in</strong>gs, which are shown <strong>in</strong> the table below.<br />

This allows us to apply consistent analysis across a wide range of satisfaction<br />

research.<br />

Average rat<strong>in</strong>g Level of satisfaction<br />

Under 50<br />

Very low/weak/poor<br />

50-54 Low/weak/poor<br />

55-64<br />

Fairly/relatively/quite<br />

low/weak/poor<br />

65-69 Fair/reasonable<br />

70-79 Fairly/relatively/quite good<br />

80-84 Good or fairly high<br />

85-90 Very good or high<br />

90+ Excellent or very high<br />

All the transport types receive fairly good/high overall satisfaction mean rat<strong>in</strong>gs,<br />

and this is true across all ethnic groups.<br />

While still good, BAME Londoners give lower overall satisfaction rat<strong>in</strong>gs compared<br />

to white Londoners. In general, older Londoners tend to be more satisfied with<br />

public transport. The greater proportion of older white Londoners than older<br />

BAME Londoners may expla<strong>in</strong> some of the differential <strong>in</strong> rat<strong>in</strong>gs. However, for the<br />

transport types where sufficient data exists, younger BAME respondents still<br />

provide lower satisfaction rat<strong>in</strong>gs than younger white respondents, <strong>in</strong>dicat<strong>in</strong>g that<br />

there is more to the differences than just age.<br />

In particular, BAME Londoners rate the Woolwich ferry, taxis, the Victoria coach<br />

station and DaR lower than white Londoners [16].<br />

Transport for London – Women 53


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Overall satisfaction with transport types – all customers (2014/15) [16]<br />

Satisfaction score All White BAME Black Asian Mixed<br />

(0-100)<br />

Bus services<br />

Base (14,155) (9,401) (4,622) (1,990) (1,840) (792)<br />

Satisfaction score 85 86 83 83 83 83<br />

Bus stations<br />

Base (3,626) (1,850) (1,136) (509) (412) (215)<br />

Satisfaction score 78 80 77 77 78 76<br />

Night buses<br />

Base (910) (550) (350) (169) (131) (50)<br />

Satisfaction score 81 82 78 80 78 73<br />

Underground<br />

Base (17,634) (13,381) (4,186) (975) (2,101) (1,110)<br />

Satisfaction score 84 85 83 82 83 83<br />

Overground<br />

Base (5,397) (3,531) (1,580) (558) (730) (292)<br />

Satisfaction score 83 84 81 79 82 84<br />

DLR<br />

Base (13,398) (8,232) (4,563) (1,532) (1,995) (1,036)<br />

Satisfaction score 89 89 88 87 88 87<br />

Dial-a-Ride<br />

Base (2,572) (1,937) (578) (218) (289) (71)<br />

Satisfaction score 92 93 88 90 86 90<br />

London River Services<br />

Base (2,106) (1,787) (261) (35)* (111) (115)<br />

Satisfaction score 90 90 89 - 87 90<br />

Private Hire Vehicles<br />

Base (439) (330) (102) (24)* (45)* (33)*<br />

Satisfaction score 80 80 82 - - -<br />

Taxis<br />

Base (569) (449) (110) (17)* (58) (35)*<br />

Satisfaction score 83 85 78 - 78 -<br />

Trams<br />

Base (4,329) (2,986) (1,175) (566) (406) (203)<br />

Satisfaction score 89 90 88 88 89 88<br />

Victoria Coach Station<br />

Base (1,204) (911) (290) (113) (106) (71)<br />

Satisfaction score 82 83 78 75 80 78<br />

Woolwich Ferry<br />

Base (1,056) (633) (349) (223) (90) (36)*<br />

Satisfaction score 79 84 74 76 68 -<br />

* Denotes small base size (data not shown <strong>in</strong> this report for base sizes of less than 50).<br />

Transport for London – Women 54


Score out of 100<br />

Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Bus<br />

Overall, Londoners’ satisfaction with buses is fairly high at 85 out of 100. BAME<br />

bus users are slightly less satisfied with the service overall compared to white<br />

Londoners (83 out of 100 BAME; 86 out of 100 white). Satisfaction with buses has<br />

seen a steady <strong>in</strong>crease over time among both BAME and white Londoners [16].<br />

Overall satisfaction with buses over time [16]<br />

100<br />

90<br />

80<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

78 79 80 80 79 81 82 81 81 82 84 84 86<br />

74 74 75 76 76 78 78 78 78 79 80 81 83<br />

White customers<br />

BAME customers<br />

Transport for London – Women 55


Score out of 100<br />

Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Satisfaction with value for money on buses, as with other types of transport, is<br />

lower than overall satisfaction. BAME customers rate value for money slightly<br />

lower than white customers (70 out of 100 BAME compared with 74 out of 100<br />

white). Look<strong>in</strong>g at the trend over time, satisfaction with value for money does<br />

fluctuate, but the long-term trend is relatively flat [16].<br />

Value for money satisfaction with buses over time [16]<br />

100<br />

90<br />

80<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

79 78<br />

73 73 72 74 75 75<br />

76 74 71 73<br />

69<br />

72<br />

69<br />

71<br />

70 69 70<br />

68<br />

64 64<br />

73 74<br />

67<br />

70<br />

White customers<br />

BAME customers<br />

Drivers of satisfaction<br />

The ma<strong>in</strong> drivers of satisfaction with buses are similar for both BAME and white<br />

customers and tend to relate to j<strong>our</strong>ney times, the ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g the j<strong>our</strong>ney and<br />

satisfaction with <strong>in</strong>formation on delays both at stops (more for white Londoners)<br />

and on the bus (more for BAME Londoners). Satisfaction rat<strong>in</strong>gs given by BAME<br />

customers are also likely to be driven by the time that they waited to catch the bus<br />

[16].<br />

Drivers of satisfaction for bus users [16]<br />

White customers<br />

J<strong>our</strong>ney time<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Satisfaction with <strong>in</strong>fo on delays at stop<br />

Comfort <strong>in</strong>side the bus<br />

Satisfaction with live bus <strong>in</strong>fo - TfL website<br />

on tablet\laptop\PC<br />

BAME customers<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Time waited to catch bus<br />

J<strong>our</strong>ney time<br />

Satisfaction with <strong>in</strong>fo on delays on bus<br />

Comfort <strong>in</strong>side the bus<br />

Transport for London – Women 56


Score out of 100<br />

Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Tube<br />

Overall satisfaction with the Tube is fairly high among all customers (84 out of<br />

100). BAME Tube users are slightly less satisfied than white customers (83 out of<br />

100 BAME compared with 85 out of 100 white) [16].<br />

The long-term trend of overall satisfaction with the Tube has <strong>in</strong>creased for both<br />

BAME and white customers, but is still slightly lower overall for BAME customers<br />

than for white customers [16].<br />

Overall satisfaction with the Tube over time [16]<br />

100<br />

90<br />

80<br />

70<br />

60<br />

75 77 78 79 78 78<br />

71 72 74 76<br />

73 75<br />

80 81 80 81<br />

77 77 77 78<br />

84 83 85<br />

81 81 83<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

White customers BAME customers<br />

Transport for London – Women 57


Score out of 100<br />

Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Satisfaction with value for money on the Tube is fair/reasonable among customers<br />

overall (69 out of 100). Levels of satisfaction with value for money on the Tube are<br />

lower for BAME customers than white customers (66 out of 100 BAME compared<br />

with 70 out of 100 white) [16].<br />

Value for money satisfaction with the Tube over time [16]<br />

100<br />

90<br />

80<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

63 64 63 62 62 63<br />

66 68 66 64<br />

61 62 61 62<br />

60<br />

62 64<br />

66<br />

63<br />

58<br />

67 68 70<br />

63 64 66<br />

White customers BAME customers<br />

Transport for London – Women 58


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Drivers of satisfaction<br />

The top three drivers of satisfaction with the Tube are ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>neys,<br />

comfort on the j<strong>our</strong>ney and length of the j<strong>our</strong>ney. These top three reasons are the<br />

same for BAME and white Londoners [16].<br />

Drivers of satisfaction for Tube users [16]<br />

White customers<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Comfort of j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Length of j<strong>our</strong>ney time<br />

Length of time wait<strong>in</strong>g for tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Tra<strong>in</strong> crowd<strong>in</strong>g<br />

BAME customers<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Comfort of j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Length of j<strong>our</strong>ney time<br />

Smoothness of j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Personal safety on tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Overground<br />

Overall satisfaction among all customers us<strong>in</strong>g the Overground is fairly high at 83<br />

out of 100. Among BAME customers of the Overground, overall satisfaction is<br />

slightly lower at 81 out of 100 [16].<br />

Overall satisfaction with London Overground over time – all customers [16]<br />

Satisfaction score All White BAME Black Asian Mixed<br />

(0-100)<br />

Base 2014/15 (5,397) (3,531) (1,580) (558) (730) (292)<br />

2009/10 73 74 72 71 73 70<br />

2010/11 80 82 79 78 78 80<br />

2011/12 82 83 80 78 80 80<br />

2012/13 82 83 80 79 81 79<br />

2013/14 82 83 79 77 80 79<br />

2014/15 83 84 81 79 82 84<br />

Overall satisfaction with value for money on the Overground is 73 out of 100.<br />

BAME Londoners are as satisfied as white Londoners (72 out of 100 white) [16].<br />

Satisfaction with value for money with London Overground over time – all customers [16]<br />

Satisfaction score All White BAME Black Asian Mixed<br />

(0-100)<br />

Base 2014/15 (5,182) (3,482) (1,575) (557) (730) (288)<br />

2011/12 72 73 69 67 70 70<br />

2012/13 71 79 69 69 71 65<br />

2013/14 70 71 68 67 69 68<br />

2014/15 73 72 73 73 73 74<br />

Transport for London – Women 59


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Drivers of satisfaction<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g a j<strong>our</strong>ney, the condition of tra<strong>in</strong>s and feel<strong>in</strong>g valued as a customer<br />

are the ma<strong>in</strong> drivers of satisfaction for white and BAME customers <strong>in</strong> relation to<br />

overall satisfaction with London Overground.<br />

Drivers of satisfaction for Overground users [16]<br />

White customers<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Condition and state of repair of the tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Feel valued as a customer<br />

How well the <strong>in</strong>formation or assistance met<br />

needs<br />

Comfort of tra<strong>in</strong><br />

BAME customers<br />

Condition and state of repair of the tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g y<strong>our</strong> j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Feel valued as a customer<br />

General <strong>in</strong>formation about tra<strong>in</strong> times and<br />

routes at the station<br />

Information about service disruptions on the<br />

tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Docklands Light Railway (DLR)<br />

Overall satisfaction with the DLR is high among customers us<strong>in</strong>g the network at<br />

89 out of 100. There is little difference between BAME and white users of the DLR<br />

(88 out of 100 BAME compared to 89 out of 100 white) [16].<br />

Overall satisfaction with DLR over time – all customers [16]<br />

Satisfaction score All White BAME Black Asian Mixed<br />

(0-100)<br />

Base 2014/15 (13,398) (8,232) (4,563) (1,532) (1,995) (1,036)<br />

2009/10 81 82 79 79 80 78<br />

2010/11 81 83 80 80 79 81<br />

2011/12 82 84 81 81 81 82<br />

2012/13 87 87 86 85 87 86<br />

2013/14 87 88 85 85 86 85<br />

2014/15 89 89 88 87 88 87<br />

Overall satisfaction with value for money on the DLR is quite good (77 out of 100),<br />

but it is slightly lower for BAME customers than white customers (76 out of 100<br />

BAME compared to 78 out of 100 white) [16].<br />

Satisfaction with value for money with DLR over time – all customers [16]<br />

Satisfaction score All White BAME Black Asian Mixed<br />

(0-100)<br />

Base 2014/15 (12,839) (8,060) (4,527) (1,510) (1,989) (1,028)<br />

2011/12 72 74 70 70 70 70<br />

2012/13 74 75 72 73 71 71<br />

2013/14 75 76 73 74 74 70<br />

2014/15 77 78 76 76 76 76<br />

Transport for London – Women 60


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Drivers of satisfaction<br />

Among both BAME and white DLR customers the drivers of satisfaction are very<br />

similar. BAME customer satisfaction is slightly more related to feel<strong>in</strong>g valued<br />

rather than the length of time the j<strong>our</strong>ney took [16].<br />

Drivers of satisfaction for DLR users [16]<br />

White customers<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Comfort <strong>in</strong>side the tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Length of time j<strong>our</strong>ney took<br />

Reliability of tra<strong>in</strong>s<br />

Feel valued as a customer<br />

BAME customers<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Comfort <strong>in</strong>side the tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Feel valued as a customer<br />

Reliability of tra<strong>in</strong>s<br />

Length of time you waited for the tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Trams<br />

Overall satisfaction with trams is high among customers at 89 out of 100. This is<br />

slightly lower among BAME users than white tram customers (88 out of 100 BAME<br />

compared with 90 out of 100 white) [16].<br />

Overall satisfaction with trams over time – all customers [16]<br />

Satisfaction score All White BAME Black Asian Mixed<br />

(0-100)<br />

Base 2014/15 (4,329) (2,986) (1,175) (566) (406) (203)<br />

2009/10 86 87 86 84 * *<br />

2010/11 85 86 84 83 83 87<br />

2011/12 86 87 84 83 84 *<br />

2012/13 89 90 87 87 88 87<br />

2013/14 89 90 88 88 89 89<br />

2014/15 89 90 88 88 89 88<br />

* Denotes small base size (percentages not shown <strong>in</strong> this report for base sizes of less than 50).<br />

Overall satisfaction with value for money on the tram network is quite good (78<br />

out of 100) but it is slightly lower for BAME customers than white customers (77<br />

out of 100 BAME compared to 79 out of 100 white) [16].<br />

Satisfaction with value for money with trams over time – all customers [16]<br />

Satisfaction score All White BAME Black Asian Mixed<br />

(0-100)<br />

Base 2014/15 (2,824) (1,801) (1,002) (487) (337) (178)<br />

2011/12 73 75 70 69 73 *<br />

2012/13 77 79 75 77 73 73<br />

2013/14 78 79 77 77 77 79<br />

2014/15 78 79 77 77 77 77<br />

* Denotes small base size (percentages not shown <strong>in</strong> this report for base sizes of less than 50).<br />

Transport for London – Women 61


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Streets<br />

There is little difference <strong>in</strong> the satisfaction rat<strong>in</strong>gs given by BAME and white<br />

Londoners <strong>in</strong> terms of the use of London’s streets. Overall satisfaction with streets<br />

and pavements is higher for people mak<strong>in</strong>g a j<strong>our</strong>ney on foot than by car [34].<br />

Overall satisfaction with streets and pavement after last j<strong>our</strong>ney over time – walk<strong>in</strong>g<br />

j<strong>our</strong>ney [34]<br />

Net fairly<br />

All White BAME<br />

satisfied/very<br />

satisfied (%)<br />

Base 2014/15 (957) (732) (184)<br />

2011 64 61 74<br />

2012 68 65 77<br />

2013 69 67 75<br />

2014 68 67 72<br />

2015 68 69 69<br />

Overall satisfaction with streets and pavements after last j<strong>our</strong>ney over time - car j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

[34]<br />

Net fairly<br />

All White BAME<br />

satisfied/very<br />

satisfied (%)<br />

Base 2014/15 (830) (630) (163)<br />

2011 54 52 61<br />

2012 62 60 68<br />

2013 57 54 65<br />

2014 61 59 64<br />

2015 60 60 61<br />

Please note that satisfaction for streets is calculated as a comb<strong>in</strong>ation of ‘very<br />

satisfied’ and ‘fairly satisfied’ rather than the 11-po<strong>in</strong>t scale used for other<br />

customer satisfaction survey (CSS) results [34].<br />

Transport for London – Women 62


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Transport for London Road Network (TRLN)<br />

Satisfaction with the TLRN is reasonable to fairly good. BAME users of the TLRN<br />

give a score of 68 out of 100 for walk<strong>in</strong>g, 71 out of 100 for <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g by bus on red<br />

routes and 66 out of 100 for driv<strong>in</strong>g. There are very few differences by ethnicity<br />

[16].<br />

Overall satisfaction – general impression of red routes over time [16]<br />

Satisfaction score (0-100) All White BAME Black Asian Mixed<br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Base 2014-15 (1,254) (936) (318) (74) (130) (114)<br />

2013/14 70 70 70 74 73 63<br />

2014/15 68 68 68 65 71 65<br />

Travell<strong>in</strong>g by bus<br />

Base 2014-15 (4,620) (3,392) (1,228) (396) (423) (409)<br />

2013/14 69 69 72 74 71 69<br />

2014/15 71 70 71 73 72 68<br />

Driv<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Base 2014-15 (3,605) (3,029) (576) (156) (253) (167)<br />

2013/14 67 67 66 70 66 65<br />

2014/15 67 67 66 70 65 63<br />

Cycl<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Base 2014-15 (1,838) (1,405) (433) (76) (195) (162)<br />

2013/14 69 68 72 * * *<br />

2014/15 70 70 72 75 74 66<br />

* Denotes small base size (data not shown <strong>in</strong> this report for base sizes of less than 50).<br />

Transport for London – Women 63


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Access to <strong>in</strong>formation<br />

Information needs<br />

For some BAME Londoners language can be a significant barrier to public<br />

transport use, especially among people who were not born <strong>in</strong> the UK. While this is<br />

less of an issue for familiar j<strong>our</strong>neys, it can limit the extent to which people make<br />

unfamiliar j<strong>our</strong>neys [27].<br />

Access to the <strong>in</strong>ternet<br />

A higher proportion of BAME Londoners have access to the <strong>in</strong>ternet than white<br />

Londoners (96 per cent BAME compared with 91 per cent white). This is almost<br />

entirely due to the older age profile of white Londoners, as the proportion of<br />

BAME and white Londoners aged between 16 and 64 who access the <strong>in</strong>ternet is<br />

very similar (98 per cent BAME 16-64 year olds compared with 96 per cent white<br />

16-64 year olds) [15].<br />

Both BAME and white 16 to 64-year-old Londoners tend to access the <strong>in</strong>ternet <strong>in</strong><br />

similar places:<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

N<strong>in</strong>ety-f<strong>our</strong> per cent of BAME and 95 per cent of white Londoners aged<br />

between 16 and 64 access the <strong>in</strong>ternet at home<br />

Sixty-eight per cent of BAME 16-64 year olds access the <strong>in</strong>ternet ‘on the move’<br />

compared with 70 per cent of white Londoners of this age<br />

Sixty-three per cent of BAME 16 to 64year olds access the <strong>in</strong>ternet at work,<br />

which is slightly lower than the proportion of white Londoners <strong>in</strong> this age<br />

group access<strong>in</strong>g the <strong>in</strong>ternet at work (66 per cent) [15]<br />

Transport for London – Women 64


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Access to the <strong>in</strong>ternet among ethnic groups (Apr/ Oct 2014) [15]<br />

% All White BAME White BAME White BAME<br />

16-64 16-64 65+ 65+<br />

Base (2,001) (1,483) (394) (932) (343) (551) (51)<br />

Any access 92 91 96 96 98 66 49<br />

Access at home 89 89 92 95 94 65 49<br />

Access ‘on the<br />

61 59 66 70 68 16 10<br />

move’<br />

Access at work 56 54 61 66 63 5 6<br />

Across all ethnic groups <strong>in</strong> London there is a wide range of different uses for the<br />

<strong>in</strong>ternet. While most uses of the <strong>in</strong>ternet are common across ethnic groups, there<br />

are several differences <strong>in</strong> the proportion of Londoners <strong>in</strong> each ethnic group<br />

undertak<strong>in</strong>g specific tasks.<br />

From <strong>our</strong> research of <strong>travel</strong>-related <strong>in</strong>ternet use, we found that the ma<strong>in</strong><br />

difference is <strong>in</strong> us<strong>in</strong>g the <strong>in</strong>ternet for day-to-day <strong>travel</strong> plans (61 per cent BAME<br />

compared with 71 per cent white).<br />

Transport for London – Women 65


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

Mobile device usage and onl<strong>in</strong>e behavi<strong>our</strong><br />

BAME Londoners are more likely than white Londoners to use smartphones (90<br />

per cent BAME compared with 71 per cent white). This pattern is evident even<br />

when account<strong>in</strong>g for the younger average age of BAME Londoners compared to<br />

white Londoners [15].<br />

Proportion of Londoners who use a smartphone (iPhone, BlackBerry, Android, other)<br />

(Apr/ Oct 2014) [15]<br />

% Base Smartphone ownership<br />

All Londoners (2,001) 77<br />

White Londoners (1,483) 71<br />

BAME Londoners (394) 90<br />

16-24-year-old white<br />

Londoners<br />

16-24-year-old BAME<br />

Londoners<br />

16-64-year-old white<br />

Londoners<br />

16-64-year-old BAME<br />

Londoners<br />

(70) 94<br />

(64) 100<br />

(932) 82<br />

(343) 92<br />

65+-year-old white Londoners (551) 25<br />

65+-year-old BAME Londoner (51) 27<br />

Transport for London – Women 66


Black, Asian and m<strong>in</strong>ority ethnic (BAME) people<br />

We have found a number of differences among BAME and white Londoners <strong>in</strong><br />

terms of the social media channels that they use:<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

A greater proportion of white than BAME Londoners use Facebook (80 per<br />

cent BAME social media users compared with 85 per cent white)<br />

A higher proportion of BAME than white Londoners use YouTube (44 per cent<br />

BAME social media users compared with 38 per cent white)<br />

A larger proportion of BAME than white Londoners use Instagram (31 per cent<br />

BAME social media users compared with 17 per cent white)<br />

More BAME Londoners use Google+ compared with white Londoners (17 per<br />

cent BAME compared with 10 per cent white)<br />

Use of Twitter is more even between BAME and white Londoners (32 per cent for<br />

BAME compared with 33 per cent for White Londoners) [15].<br />

Use of the TfL website<br />

The proportion of both BAME and white Londoners who have used the TfL<br />

website is very similar (80 per cent BAME compared to 79 per cent white).<br />

However, when look<strong>in</strong>g solely at 16-64year olds, slightly fewer BAME Londoners<br />

access the TfL website than white Londoners (82 per cent BAME compared to 86<br />

per cent white) [15].<br />

Proportion of Londoners who visit www.tfl.gov.uk (Apr/ Oct 2014) [15]<br />

% All White BAME<br />

Base (2,001) (1,483) (394)<br />

Any 78 79 80<br />

Daily 10 9 12<br />

Up to 3-4 times a week 21 21 22<br />

Up to 3-4 times a month 20 23 16<br />

About once a month 17 16 18<br />

Less than once a month 11 11 12<br />

Never 20 20 19<br />

Don’t know/ refused 2 1 1<br />

Access<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>formation <strong>in</strong> the event of <strong>travel</strong> disruption<br />

The proportion of <strong>in</strong>ternet users stat<strong>in</strong>g that they obta<strong>in</strong> real-time <strong>travel</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong>formation from the TfL website is similar between BAME and white Londoners<br />

(71 per cent BAME compared to 70 per cent white). Most other channels (such as<br />

other websites, apps, and Twitter feeds) are used relatively evenly by both BAME<br />

and white Londoners [15].<br />

Transport for London – Women 67


Women<br />

Summary: Women<br />

Key f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs<br />

Accord<strong>in</strong>g to the 2011 Census, 51 per cent of Londoners are women [2]<br />

Women tend to complete more weekday trips on average than men (2.8 for women<br />

compared to 2.6 for men) [12]<br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g is the most commonly used type of transport by women (96 per cent walk at<br />

least once a week). Women are more likely to use buses than men (65 per cent women<br />

compared with 58 per cent men), but are less likely to use other types of transport<br />

<strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g the Tube (35 per cent women compared with 42 per cent men) [12]<br />

Women are more likely than men to be <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g with buggies and/or shopp<strong>in</strong>g, and<br />

this can affect transport choices [35]<br />

Satisfaction with transport among women and men is very similar and is ma<strong>in</strong>ly driven<br />

by the ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g the j<strong>our</strong>ney [16]<br />

Women are more likely than men to experience episodes of worry when <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g on<br />

public transport and this is more likely to reduce their frequency of <strong>travel</strong> than for men<br />

[14]<br />

Use of the TfL website is equally high among women and men (both 78 per cent) [15]<br />

We recognise that there may be barriers to transport faced by some transgender<br />

women and men. However, we do not yet have sufficient data to provide a detailed<br />

analysis<br />

Transport for London – Women 68


Women<br />

Profile of women <strong>in</strong> London<br />

In l<strong>in</strong>e with the rest of England and the UK, 51 per cent of Londoners are women.<br />

There is little variation across the London boroughs <strong>in</strong> terms of the split between<br />

women and men; only the City of London, Newham and Tower Hamlets see any<br />

sizeable difference from the average across the Capital (45 per cent of City of<br />

London residents and 48 per cent of Newham and Tower Hamlets residents are<br />

women) [2].<br />

The key demographic differences between women and men are employment<br />

status and household <strong>in</strong>come. Thirty-eight per cent of women are not work<strong>in</strong>g or<br />

are retired, with a further 15 per cent employed part-time (compared to 24 per<br />

cent and seven per cent of men respectively) [12]. Women are also more likely to<br />

be the primary carer of children at home. Both of these factors appear to <strong>in</strong>fluence<br />

the <strong>travel</strong> behavi<strong>our</strong> and attitudes of women <strong>in</strong> London.<br />

Transport behavi<strong>our</strong><br />

Women make a greater number of j<strong>our</strong>neys per weekday than men. Trips made by women<br />

tend to be shorter [12].<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

Women are more likely than men to use the bus at least once a week (65 per<br />

cent of women do so, compared with 58 per cent of men) and are less likely to<br />

<strong>travel</strong> by Tube at least once a week (35 per cent of women compared with 42<br />

per cent of men) [12]. Women are also less likely to ever cycle <strong>in</strong> London (10<br />

per cent of women compared with 16 per cent men) [17]<br />

Women are less likely to drive at least once a week (35 per cent of women do<br />

so compared with 44 per cent of men). However, they are more likely to be a<br />

car passenger (55 per cent compared with 42 per cent of men) [12]<br />

Women are less likely to be employed full or part-time, and this is reflected <strong>in</strong><br />

the smaller proportion of j<strong>our</strong>neys that are made by women for work purposes<br />

than men (22 per cent compared with 34 per cent of j<strong>our</strong>neys made by men). A<br />

higher proportion of j<strong>our</strong>neys made by women are for shopp<strong>in</strong>g/personal<br />

bus<strong>in</strong>ess (27 per cent of women’s j<strong>our</strong>neys compared with 21 per cent of<br />

j<strong>our</strong>neys made by men) [12]<br />

Women are equally likely as men to use Oyster PAYG to <strong>travel</strong> around London<br />

(59 per cent of women compared with 58 per cent of men) [32]<br />

Transport for London – Women 69


Women<br />

Barriers<br />

The reasons that men and women give as barriers to us<strong>in</strong>g public transport are<br />

often similar. The most commonly mentioned barriers for both women and men<br />

are overcrowded services and the cost of tickets. There are some differences,<br />

however, particularly around fear of crime where women are more likely to<br />

experience barriers [14].<br />

Personal safety is a concern for some women. While 81 per cent of men are<br />

considered to be ‘unworried’ accord<strong>in</strong>g to <strong>our</strong> typology of worry on public<br />

transport, only 70 per cent of women are considered ‘unworried’. Likewise, seven<br />

per cent of women are considered ‘worried’ compared with f<strong>our</strong> per cent of men<br />

[14].<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

Women are more likely than men to take precautions aga<strong>in</strong>st crime when<br />

us<strong>in</strong>g public transport (42 per cent of women compared with per cent of men)<br />

[14]<br />

The most common precaution taken by women is to sit next to other people<br />

(39 per cent of women who take precautions when <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g on public<br />

transport do this). Travell<strong>in</strong>g with someone else and look<strong>in</strong>g after their<br />

belong<strong>in</strong>gs are the other ma<strong>in</strong> precautions taken by women (both 28 per cent)<br />

[14]<br />

Concerns around crime and antisocial behavi<strong>our</strong> also have an impact upon<br />

women’s frequency of public transport use: 61 per cent report that the<br />

frequency with which they <strong>travel</strong> is affected ‘a lot’ or ‘a little’ because of these<br />

concerns, compared with 43 per cent of men [14]<br />

Women (of all ages) are less likely to use unbooked m<strong>in</strong>icabs, with 13 per cent<br />

claim<strong>in</strong>g they are likely to do so <strong>in</strong> future compared to 26 per cent of men [36]<br />

Among Londoners who are will<strong>in</strong>g to answer the question, 11 per cent of<br />

women report experienc<strong>in</strong>g some form of unwanted sexual behavi<strong>our</strong> while<br />

<strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> London <strong>in</strong> the previous year (the equivalent figure for men is two<br />

per cent) [14]<br />

Customer satisfaction<br />

Women are generally satisfied with public transport <strong>in</strong> London and report very<br />

similar satisfaction levels to men [16].<br />

Among women us<strong>in</strong>g the bus, overall satisfaction is fairly high (85 out of 100)<br />

and is ma<strong>in</strong>ly l<strong>in</strong>ked to the ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g a j<strong>our</strong>ney and j<strong>our</strong>ney time<br />

Overall satisfaction with the Tube is also fairly high at 85 out of 100. This is<br />

l<strong>in</strong>ked to the ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>neys, comfort and j<strong>our</strong>ney time issues<br />

Overall satisfaction with both the Tube and bus has <strong>in</strong>creased significantly<br />

from 2002/03 to 2014/15. Satisfaction among women who use the bus has<br />

<strong>in</strong>creased from 76 to 85 out of 100 and for the Tube from 75 to 85 [16]<br />

Transport for London – Women 70


Women<br />

Access to <strong>in</strong>formation<br />

Use of the TfL website is high among women and men (both 78 per cent) [15]<br />

For both women and men, the ma<strong>in</strong> reason for us<strong>in</strong>g the TfL website is to use<br />

J<strong>our</strong>ney Planner. However, women are significantly more likely to use it than<br />

men (71 per cent women compared with 62 per cent men). Women are less<br />

likely to make use of live <strong>travel</strong> updates (27 per cent women compared with 34<br />

per cent men) [37]<br />

Transport for London – Women 71


Women<br />

Introduction<br />

In l<strong>in</strong>e with the demographic profile of the UK <strong>in</strong> general, women make up 51 per<br />

cent of the London population [2]. On the whole, women and men have similar<br />

experiences and requirements from the transport network. However, there are<br />

some key differences, particularly relat<strong>in</strong>g to age, employment status and safety<br />

and security issues.<br />

TfL’s S<strong>in</strong>gle Equality Scheme addresses many of the issues that we have identified<br />

<strong>in</strong> the research presented <strong>in</strong> this document. We have <strong>in</strong>troduced a number of<br />

<strong>in</strong>itiatives, such as the ‘Safer Travel at Night’ scheme, which aims to <strong>in</strong>crease<br />

awareness of the risks posed by us<strong>in</strong>g unbooked m<strong>in</strong>icabs [22].<br />

This chapter focuses on the transport issues that are relevant to women <strong>in</strong><br />

London. It is important to note that the differences highlighted between women<br />

and men <strong>in</strong> this chapter may well be <strong>in</strong>fluenced by a number of factors other than<br />

gender, with age, <strong>in</strong>come, work<strong>in</strong>g status and education all affect<strong>in</strong>g perceptions<br />

towards <strong>travel</strong> <strong>in</strong> London and <strong>travel</strong> behavi<strong>our</strong>.<br />

Transport for London – Women 72


Women<br />

Profile of women <strong>in</strong> London<br />

Fifty-one per cent of Londoners are women, which is the same split as across<br />

England as a whole [2].<br />

Gender profile of Londoners 2011 Census [2]<br />

% Proportion of Londoners<br />

Men 49<br />

Women 51<br />

London has a much younger age profile than England as a whole, with 52 per cent<br />

of the London population aged under 34, compared to 44 per cent across England.<br />

This younger age profile is seen for both women and men [2].<br />

Age profile of women and men <strong>in</strong> London and England (2011) [2]<br />

% of total London/England<br />

population<br />

Age groups All Men Women<br />

London<br />

0-34 52 26 26<br />

35-54 28 14 14<br />

55+ 20 9 11<br />

England<br />

0-34 44 22 22<br />

35-54 28 14 14<br />

55+ 28 13 15<br />

Base size not shown, as data are based on ONS Census data.<br />

Transport for London – Women 73


Women<br />

Women and men make up a roughly equal proportion of each age group until<br />

around 80 years of age. Londoners over 80 are much more likely to be women<br />

than men (see population pyramid) [2].<br />

2014<br />

9 0-4<br />

80+<br />

75-<br />

70- 79<br />

65- 74<br />

60-<br />

0-4 69<br />

55-<br />

0-4<br />

64<br />

0-4<br />

50- 59<br />

45-<br />

0-4 54<br />

0-4<br />

40- 49<br />

0-4 35-39 44<br />

0-4 30-<br />

25- 34<br />

20- 29<br />

0-4<br />

15- 24<br />

0-4<br />

10- 19<br />

0-4 14 5-<br />

0-4<br />

10-14<br />

10-14<br />

10-14<br />

10-14<br />

10-14<br />

10-14<br />

Reflect<strong>in</strong>g the fact that more older Londoners are women than men, women are<br />

marg<strong>in</strong>ally more likely than men to be disabled (11 per cent of London’s women<br />

are disabled, compared with n<strong>in</strong>e per cent for London’s men, and 56 per cent of<br />

disabled Londoners are women). Similarly, women are more likely than men to be<br />

retired (17 per cent of women are retired compared with 13 per cent of men, and<br />

58 per cent of retired Londoners are women) [12].<br />

With<strong>in</strong> this document there are two ma<strong>in</strong> s<strong>our</strong>ces of demographic data: the Office<br />

for National Statistics Census and the London Travel Demand Survey. The<br />

follow<strong>in</strong>g table shows the demographic breakdown of Londoners recorded <strong>in</strong> the<br />

LTDS.<br />

Transport for London – Women 74


Women<br />

LTDS demographic profile of women and men <strong>in</strong> London (2013/14) [12]<br />

% Men Women Proportion of<br />

category that are<br />

women<br />

Base (7,518) (8,182) (varies)<br />

Age<br />

5-10 8 8 48<br />

11-15 6 6 48<br />

16-24 14 14 50<br />

25-59 55 55 50<br />

60-64 5 5 52<br />

65-70 5 5 52<br />

71-80 4 5 57<br />

81+ 2 3 59<br />

Ethnicity<br />

White 62 62 51<br />

BAME 37 37 51<br />

Household <strong>in</strong>come<br />

Less than £10,000 15 20 58<br />

£10,000–£19,999 17 20 54<br />

£20,000–£34,999 20 19 50<br />

£35,000–£49,999 14 13 49<br />

£50,000–£74,999 16 14 47<br />

£75,000+ 18 14 46<br />

Work<strong>in</strong>g status*<br />

Work<strong>in</strong>g full-time 58 36 39<br />

Work<strong>in</strong>g part-time 7 15 70<br />

Student 11 10 50<br />

Retired 13 17 58<br />

Not work<strong>in</strong>g 11 21 68<br />

Disabled<br />

Yes 10 12 56<br />

No 90 88 50<br />

Impairment affects <strong>travel</strong><br />

Yes 8 11 57<br />

No 92 89 50<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five and work<strong>in</strong>g status does not <strong>in</strong>clude under 16s. All TfL surveys use the<br />

Equality Act 2010 to def<strong>in</strong>e disabled people as those who def<strong>in</strong>e themselves as hav<strong>in</strong>g a long-term physical or mental disability or health issue<br />

that impacts on their daily activities, the work they can do, or limits their ability to <strong>travel</strong>.<br />

Transport for London – Women 75


Women<br />

The proportion of Londoners who are white and who are BAME is very similar for<br />

women and men. However, look<strong>in</strong>g at specific ethnic groups <strong>in</strong> London, there are<br />

some differences by gender. For example, 51 per cent of white Londoners are<br />

women compared to 43 per cent of Arab Londoners [2].<br />

Proportion of women liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> London by detailed ethnic group [2]<br />

Ethnic group<br />

% Women<br />

All 51<br />

White: Total 51<br />

English/Welsh/Scottish/Northern Irish/British 50<br />

Irish 52<br />

Gypsy or Irish Traveller 52<br />

Other white 52<br />

Mixed/multiple ethnic group: Total 51<br />

White and black Caribbean 52<br />

White and black African 51<br />

White and Asian 49<br />

Other mixed 52<br />

Asian/Asian British: Total 50<br />

Indian 49<br />

Pakistani 47<br />

Bangladeshi 49<br />

Ch<strong>in</strong>ese 54<br />

Other Asian 51<br />

Black/African/Caribbean/black British: Total 53<br />

African 53<br />

Caribbean 56<br />

Other black 50<br />

Other ethnic group: Total 47<br />

Arab 43<br />

Any other ethnic group 49<br />

Transport for London – Women 76


Women<br />

Employment and <strong>in</strong>come<br />

Differences exist between women and men <strong>in</strong> terms of employment and<br />

household <strong>in</strong>come. Higher proportions of women say that they are currently not<br />

employed (21 per cent of women compared with 11 per cent of men) and 68 per<br />

cent of Londoners aged 16 or over and not employed are women. More women<br />

than men are employed part-time (12 per cent of women compared with five per<br />

cent of of men) and 70 per cent of Londoners work<strong>in</strong>g part-time are women [12].<br />

Women are more likely than men to have a low household <strong>in</strong>come. Forty per cent<br />

of women have an <strong>in</strong>come of less than £20,000 per year compared with 32 per<br />

cent of men. This may be l<strong>in</strong>ked to the higher proportion of women be<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> parttime<br />

employment, retired or not work<strong>in</strong>g [12].<br />

Women get paid less than men on average. The median salary <strong>in</strong> 2013 for a<br />

woman <strong>in</strong> London was £25,411 compared with £35,894 for men. This is due <strong>in</strong> part<br />

to the <strong>in</strong>creased number of part-time positions occupied by women. Women<br />

occupy 71 per cent of part-time positions <strong>in</strong> the Capital. However, even when<br />

look<strong>in</strong>g solely at full-time salaries there is still a discrepancy <strong>in</strong> the average annual<br />

pay for women and men; the median full-time annual pay for a woman <strong>in</strong> London<br />

is £31,100, compared to £38,606 for a man [38].<br />

The employment rate of women is affected by child dependency. Employment<br />

rates (noted <strong>in</strong> 2010) decl<strong>in</strong>e steadily from 78 per cent of women with no<br />

dependent children to 22 per cent of women with f<strong>our</strong> or more dependent children<br />

[39]. These family commitments also change the way <strong>in</strong> which women use public<br />

transport, affect<strong>in</strong>g their <strong>travel</strong> patterns and behavi<strong>our</strong>.<br />

London boroughs<br />

We found few differences <strong>in</strong> the split between women and men across London’s<br />

boroughs. The City of London has the lowest proportion of women; with<strong>in</strong> the City<br />

only 45 per cent of residents are women. Newham and Tower Hamlets also have a<br />

lower than average proportion of women, both with 48 per cent. All other<br />

boroughs lie with<strong>in</strong> two percentage po<strong>in</strong>ts of the London average [2].<br />

Transport for London – Women 77


Women<br />

Travel behavi<strong>our</strong><br />

On average, women <strong>in</strong> London take a greater number of trips on a weekday than<br />

men (2.8 women compared with 2.6 men) [12].<br />

The difference <strong>in</strong> the number of trips made by women and men changes with age.<br />

Women aged 65 and older take as many trips as men of the same age [12].<br />

Average number of weekday trips (2013/14) [12]<br />

Age groups Men Women Difference<br />

All 2.6 2.8 0.2<br />

Under 16s 2.3 2.4 0.1<br />

16-24 2.3 2.5 0.2<br />

25-64 2.7 3.1 0.4<br />

65+ 2.3 2.3 -<br />

Base: Men all 5,231; under 16, 844; 16-24,606; 25-64, 2,947; 65+, 834; Women all 5,787; under 16, 812; 16-24, 650; 25-64,<br />

3,329;; 65+,996.<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Transport types used<br />

The three most common transport types used by women at least once a week are<br />

walk<strong>in</strong>g (96 per cent), bus (65 per cent) and car as a passenger (55 per cent). The<br />

most common transport types used at least once a week by men are also walk<strong>in</strong>g<br />

(97 per cent) and bus (58 per cent). However, the third most commonly used type<br />

of transport for men is the car as a driver (44 per cent) rather than as a passenger<br />

(42 per cent), or the Tube (42 per cent) [12].<br />

There are some marked differences <strong>in</strong> the types of transport that women and men<br />

liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> London use at least once a week. Women are more likely than men to<br />

<strong>travel</strong> by bus at least once a week (65 per cent of women compared with 58 per<br />

cent of men), which is a pattern that we see across age groups.<br />

<br />

<br />

Eighty-two per cent of women aged 16-24 use the bus at least once a week<br />

compared with 77 per cent of men<br />

Although the proportion of women and men aged 65 and over that use the bus<br />

at least once a week is relatively similar (63 per cent of women compared to 60<br />

per cent of men) the higher number of women <strong>in</strong> this age group <strong>in</strong>creases the<br />

proportion of bus users that are women aged 65 or over [12]<br />

Women liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> London are less likely than men to use the Tube at least once a<br />

week (35 per cent women compared with 42 per cent men). This is ma<strong>in</strong>ly driven<br />

by the reduced use of the Tube by older women. Women aged 65 and over are<br />

considerably less likely to use the Tube at least once a week than men of the same<br />

age group (19 per cent women compared with 29 per cent of men) [12].<br />

Transport for London – Women 78


Women<br />

Women aged 17 or over who are liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> London are less likely than men to have a<br />

full driv<strong>in</strong>g licence (56 per cent of women aged 17 or over compared with 72 per<br />

cent of men aged 17 or over) or have access to a car (65 per cent of all women<br />

compared with 69 per cent of all men). These factors are likely to be related to the<br />

frequency of car use as a driver that we have observed. Women are more likely to<br />

<strong>travel</strong> by car at least once a week as a passenger than men (55 per cent of women<br />

compared with 42 per cent of men) and <strong>in</strong> turn are less likely to <strong>travel</strong> by car as a<br />

driver at least once a week than men (35 per cent of women compared with 44 per<br />

cent of men) [12].<br />

The likelihood of us<strong>in</strong>g a number of modes of transport is very similar between<br />

women and men. This <strong>in</strong>cludes the likelihood of walk<strong>in</strong>g (96 per cent of women<br />

compared with 97 per cent of men), use of the Overground (eight per cent of<br />

women compared with ten per cent of men), the DLR (f<strong>our</strong> per cent of women<br />

compared with five per cent of men), black cabs (f<strong>our</strong> per cent of women<br />

compared with six per cent of men), m<strong>in</strong>icabs (both six per cent) and the tram<br />

(both two per cent) [12].<br />

Proportion of Londoners us<strong>in</strong>g types of transport at least once a week (2013/14) [12]<br />

% Men Women 16-24 25-64 65+<br />

M W M W M W<br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g 97 96 98 98 97 97 89 84<br />

Bus 58 65 77 82 52 61 60 63<br />

Car (as a driver) 44 35 19 15 59 47 59 34<br />

Tube 42 35 51 53 50 39 29 19<br />

Car (as a passenger) 42 55 54 55 32 49 32 54<br />

National Rail 19 15 22 20 24 17 14 10<br />

Overground 10 8 11 13 12 10 5 3<br />

London taxi/black cab 6 4 4 4 7 5 3 3<br />

Other taxi/m<strong>in</strong>icab (PHV) 6 6 7 9 7 6 5 6<br />

DLR 5 4 8 6 6 4 2 1<br />

Motorbike 2 - 1 - 3 - 1 -<br />

Tram (London Traml<strong>in</strong>k) 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 1<br />

Base size: Men 7,518; women 8,182; men 16-24, 906; men 25-64, 4,275; men 65+, 1,116; women 16-24, 943; women 25-64,<br />

4,730; women 65+, 1,359.<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Where there is more detailed <strong>in</strong>formation on <strong>in</strong>dividual types of transport, we<br />

have <strong>in</strong>cluded a sub-section below.<br />

Transport for London – Women 79


Women<br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g<br />

N<strong>in</strong>ety-six per cent of women walk at least once a week and 83 per cent walk five<br />

or more days a week. Walk<strong>in</strong>g frequency is very similar for women and men [12].<br />

Frequency of walk<strong>in</strong>g (2013/14) [12]<br />

% Men Women<br />

Base (7,518) (8,182)<br />

5 or more days a week 83 83<br />

3 or 4 days a week 6 6<br />

2 days a week 4 4<br />

1 day a week 3 3<br />

At least once a fortnight 1 1<br />

At least once a month 1 1<br />

At least once a year 1 1<br />

Not used <strong>in</strong> last year 1 2<br />

Never used - -<br />

*Note that LTDS <strong>in</strong> this report data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Women are more likely than men to walk a child to school at least once a week (21<br />

per cent compared with 15 per cent of men) and less likely than men to walk as<br />

part of a longer j<strong>our</strong>ney at least once a week (73 per cent of women compared to<br />

80 per cent of men). Women are also less likely than men to visit<br />

pubs/restaurants/c<strong>in</strong>emas and other social places on foot at least once a week (45<br />

per cent of women compared to 61 per cent of men) [19].<br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g at least once a week by purpose of j<strong>our</strong>ney (2015) [19]<br />

% who walk at least once a week Men Women<br />

Base (418) (582)<br />

Walk…<br />

To complete small errands such as gett<strong>in</strong>g a newspaper 85 87<br />

or post<strong>in</strong>g a letter<br />

As part of a longer j<strong>our</strong>ney 80 73<br />

To get to work/school/college 52 52<br />

To visit friends and relatives 50 48<br />

To visit pubs/restaurants/c<strong>in</strong>emas and other social<br />

61 45<br />

places<br />

To take a child to school 15 21<br />

Transport for London – Women 80


Women<br />

Bus<br />

The bus is the second most frequently used type of transport (after walk<strong>in</strong>g)<br />

among women with almost two thirds (65 per cent) us<strong>in</strong>g the bus at least once a<br />

week. This is higher than among men where 58 per cent use the bus at least once a<br />

week [12].<br />

Frequency of <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g by bus (2013/14) [12]<br />

% Men Women<br />

Base (7,518) (8,182)<br />

5 or more days a week 27 30<br />

3 or 4 days a week 11 14<br />

2 days a week 10 12<br />

1 day a week 10 9<br />

At least once a fortnight 6 5<br />

At least once a month 11 9<br />

At least once a year 15 13<br />

Not used <strong>in</strong> last year 8 7<br />

Never used 3 2<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

The most recent bus user research shows that daytime bus use among women is<br />

higher than that of men (57 per cent of bus users are women and 43 per cent are<br />

men). On night buses however, the majority of customers are men (64 per cent are<br />

men and 36 per cent are women) [28]. This may reflect concerns that women have<br />

about <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g on buses at night. Women are also less likely than men to <strong>travel</strong> at<br />

night for work [14].<br />

Comparison of day and night bus users (2014) [28]<br />

%<br />

Base<br />

Men<br />

(21,084)<br />

Women<br />

(23,622)<br />

Men<br />

16-24<br />

(5,093)<br />

Women<br />

16-24<br />

(5,957)<br />

Men<br />

25+<br />

(15,991)<br />

Women<br />

25+<br />

(17,665)<br />

Day bus users 43 57 22 23 78 77<br />

Night bus users 64 36 30 41 70 59<br />

Transport for London – Women 81


Women<br />

Work is the ma<strong>in</strong> purpose of <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g by bus among men and women, although<br />

even more so for men. Of women <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g by bus dur<strong>in</strong>g the day, 13 per cent are<br />

<strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g to or from shopp<strong>in</strong>g (this compares to 8 per cent of men)[28].<br />

Purpose of bus j<strong>our</strong>ney by gender and time of day (2014) [28]<br />

Dur<strong>in</strong>g the day<br />

At night<br />

% Men Women Men Women<br />

Base (14,982) (19,815) (5,525) (3,036)<br />

To/from or for work 58 51 56 46<br />

To/from shopp<strong>in</strong>g 8 13 1 2<br />

Visit<strong>in</strong>g friends/relatives 9 9 13 14<br />

To/from school/education 8 9 4 4<br />

Leisure 10 9 18 26<br />

Personal bus<strong>in</strong>ess 5 5 2 2<br />

Other purpose 3 3 5 6<br />

Car<br />

Women are more likely to have <strong>travel</strong>led as a car passenger than a driver <strong>in</strong> the last<br />

week. Fifty-five per cent of women <strong>travel</strong> as a passenger compared with 35 per<br />

cent <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g as a driver. These proportions are reversed for men, where 44 per<br />

cent <strong>travel</strong> as the driver and 42 per cent as a passenger [12].<br />

Fifty-six per cent of women aged 17 or over hold a full driv<strong>in</strong>g licence, a lower<br />

proportion than among men (72 per cent of men hold a driv<strong>in</strong>g licence). The<br />

proportion of Londoners who hold a driv<strong>in</strong>g licence is highest among people <strong>in</strong><br />

younger age groups, and decreases as age <strong>in</strong>creases [12].<br />

Proportion of Londoners aged 16 or over with a full car driv<strong>in</strong>g licence (2013/14) [12]<br />

% Men Women<br />

Base (6,185) (6,942)<br />

Holds a full car driv<strong>in</strong>g licence 72 56<br />

Women are less likely than men to have household access to a car. Thirty-six per<br />

cent of women do not have access to a car compared with 33 per cent of men [12].<br />

*Note that data above excludes under 16s.<br />

Transport for London – Women 82


Women<br />

Proportion of Londoners <strong>in</strong> a household with access to a car (2013/14) [12]<br />

% Men Women<br />

Base (7,518) (8,182)<br />

0 cars 33 36<br />

1 car 46 45<br />

2+ cars 21 19<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Tube<br />

Thirty-five per cent of women use the Underground at least once a week; a<br />

significantly smaller figure than men at 42 per cent. Men are also more likely than<br />

women to use the Tube on a daily basis [12].<br />

Frequency of <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g by Tube (2013/14) [12]<br />

% Men Women<br />

Base (7,518) (8,182)<br />

5 or more days a week 18 13<br />

3 or 4 days a week 7 6<br />

2 days a week 8 7<br />

1 day a week 9 9<br />

At least once a fortnight 8 8<br />

At least once a month 14 15<br />

At least once a year 24 26<br />

Not used <strong>in</strong> last year 10 12<br />

Never used 3 3<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Transport for London – Women 83


Women<br />

Cycl<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Women are less likely to cycle than men: 21 per cent of men cycle <strong>in</strong> London<br />

compared with 14 per cent of women [17].<br />

Ten per cent of women cycle regularly (at least once a week) <strong>in</strong> London and a<br />

further f<strong>our</strong> per cent cycle occasionally, with the rema<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g 86 per cent never us<strong>in</strong>g<br />

bikes as a way of gett<strong>in</strong>g around the Capital. [17].<br />

Proportion of Londoners who cycle (November 2014) [17]<br />

% Men Women<br />

Base (1,003) (1,189)<br />

Cyclist (sometimes uses a bike to get<br />

around London)<br />

Non-cyclist (never uses a bike to get<br />

around London)<br />

21 14<br />

79 86<br />

Men <strong>travel</strong> by bicycle more frequently than women (16 per cent of men compared<br />

with 10 per cent of women use a bicycle at least once a week) [17].<br />

Frequency of <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g by bicycle (November 2014) [17]<br />

% Men Women<br />

Base (1,003) (1,189)<br />

5 or more days a week 4 3<br />

3 or 4 days a week 6 3<br />

2 days a week 4 2<br />

1 day a week 2 2<br />

At least once a fortnight 2 1<br />

At least once a month 1 1<br />

At least once a year 2 2<br />

Not used <strong>in</strong> last year - -<br />

Never used 79 86<br />

Women are also less likely than men to be able to ride a bike. Seventy-n<strong>in</strong>e per<br />

cent of women liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> London can ride a bike, compared with 88 per cent of men<br />

[17].<br />

Proportion of Londoners able to ride a bike (November 2014) [17]<br />

% Men Women<br />

Base (1,003) (1,189)<br />

Can ride a bike 88 79<br />

Cannot ride a bike 12 21<br />

Transport for London – Women 84


Women<br />

We have developed a behavi<strong>our</strong>al change model to look at Londoners’ read<strong>in</strong>ess<br />

to cycle or cycle more. Sixty-n<strong>in</strong>e per cent of Londoners classified themselves as<br />

be<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the pre-contemplation category (def<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>in</strong> the table). Women show a<br />

higher level of pre-contemplation about cycl<strong>in</strong>g than men (74 per cent of women<br />

are <strong>in</strong> this category compared with 64 per cent of men) [17].<br />

Thirteen per cent of men compared with eight per cent of women are classified as<br />

be<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the ‘susta<strong>in</strong>ed change’ category, mean<strong>in</strong>g that they started cycl<strong>in</strong>g or<br />

cycl<strong>in</strong>g more a while ago and are still do<strong>in</strong>g it occasionally or regularly [17].<br />

Behavi<strong>our</strong> change model of cycl<strong>in</strong>g (November 2014) [17]<br />

% Men Women<br />

Base (all) (1,003) (1,189)<br />

Pre-contemplation<br />

‘You have never thought about it, but would be unlikely to start <strong>in</strong> the future’ 64 74<br />

‘You have thought about it, but don’t <strong>in</strong>tend start<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the future’<br />

‘You have never thought about it, but could be open to it <strong>in</strong> the future’<br />

Contemplation<br />

‘You are th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g about start<strong>in</strong>g soon’ 10 9<br />

Preparation<br />

‘You have decided to start soon’ 4 2<br />

Change<br />

‘You have tried to start recently, but are f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g it difficult’<br />

2 2<br />

‘You have started recently and are f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g it quite easy so far’<br />

Susta<strong>in</strong>ed change<br />

‘You started a while ago and are still do<strong>in</strong>g it occasionally’<br />

13 8<br />

‘You started a while ago and are still do<strong>in</strong>g it regularly’<br />

Lapsed<br />

‘You had started do<strong>in</strong>g this but couldn’t stick to it’ 6 6<br />

Transport for London – Women 85


Women<br />

Cycl<strong>in</strong>g schemes<br />

A larger proportion of men than women have used Cycle Hire (15 per cent of<br />

women have used the scheme compared with 19 per cent of men) [17].<br />

Twenty-n<strong>in</strong>e per cent of casual Cycle Hire users (def<strong>in</strong>ed as not hav<strong>in</strong>g a Cycle Hire<br />

key) are women and 23 per cent of members are women [58].<br />

Among Londoners, a similar proportion of women and men say they <strong>in</strong>tend to use<br />

the scheme <strong>in</strong> the next year (25 per cent of women compared with 30 per cent of<br />

men) [17].<br />

Expected use of Cycle Hire <strong>in</strong> the future (November 2014) [17]<br />

% Men Women<br />

Base (536) (644)<br />

Yes, def<strong>in</strong>itely/ probably 30 25<br />

Yes, def<strong>in</strong>itely 10 8<br />

Yes, probably 20 16<br />

No, probably not 31 28<br />

No, def<strong>in</strong>itely not 30 36<br />

Not sure 9 12<br />

For both women and men, levels of awareness of Cycle Superhighways are lower<br />

than for Cycle Hire. As with Cycle Hire, men are more likely than women to be<br />

aware; fifty-three per cent of women are aware of Cycle Superhighways compared<br />

to 70 per cent of men. We also observed a similar pattern with usage: 14 per cent<br />

of men have used a Cycle Superhighway compared with seven per cent of women<br />

[17].<br />

Anticipated use of Cycle Superhighways among Londoners is lower than for Cycle<br />

Hire: 17 per cent of women and 29 per cent of men say that they are def<strong>in</strong>itely/<br />

probably likely to use the Superhighways <strong>in</strong> the future [17].<br />

Expected use of Cycle Superhighways (November 2014) [17]<br />

% Men Women<br />

Base (536) (644)<br />

Yes, def<strong>in</strong>itely/ probably 29 17<br />

Yes, def<strong>in</strong>itely 8 5<br />

Yes, probably 21 13<br />

No, probably not 30 26<br />

No, def<strong>in</strong>itely not 26 37<br />

Not sure 15 19<br />

Transport for London – Women 86


Women<br />

Dial-a-Ride<br />

Dial-a-Ride members are more likely to be women than men. Seventy-f<strong>our</strong> per<br />

cent of Dial-a-Ride members are women and this proportion <strong>in</strong>creases with age<br />

[30]. The 2011 Census also shows that disabled Londoners are more likely to be<br />

women than men and that the proportion of women tends to <strong>in</strong>crease with age.<br />

However, this does not happen to the same extent as the profile of Dial-a-Ride<br />

members [2].<br />

Dial-a-Ride (DaR) membership by gender (2014) [2, 30]<br />

% All disabled<br />

DaR members<br />

Londoners<br />

Base (excludes unknown data) - (41,639)<br />

Men 45 26<br />

Women 55 74<br />

Gender splits of Dial-a-Ride membership by age (2014) [2, 30] 2<br />

All disabled London<br />

residents<br />

All DaR members (%)<br />

(2011 Census %)<br />

Age Men Women Men Women<br />

Base - - (11,031) (30,608)<br />

Under 18 58 42 63 37<br />

18-34 49 51 47 53<br />

35-49 48 52 38 62<br />

50-64 47 53 35 65<br />

65-79 45 55 28 72<br />

80-89 34 66 23 77<br />

90+ 23 77 21 79<br />

2 Where data does not add up to 100 per cent, this is due to respondents not disclos<strong>in</strong>g their gender.<br />

Transport for London – Women 87


Women<br />

J<strong>our</strong>ney purpose<br />

Weekday j<strong>our</strong>ney purpose varies between women and men <strong>in</strong> London. Women are<br />

less likely to be <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g for work than men (17 per cent of women compared with<br />

23 per cent of men). This may be l<strong>in</strong>ked to the higher proportion of women who<br />

are economically <strong>in</strong>active.<br />

A greater proportion of j<strong>our</strong>neys by women are for the purposes of<br />

shopp<strong>in</strong>g/personal bus<strong>in</strong>ess which accounts for 27 per cent of weekday j<strong>our</strong>neys<br />

(compared with 21 per cent of those made by men). Women are also more likely<br />

than men to be mak<strong>in</strong>g trips for education, which <strong>in</strong>cludes tak<strong>in</strong>g children to<br />

school (21 per cent of women compared with 16 per cent of men) [12].<br />

Weekday j<strong>our</strong>ney purpose (2013/14) [12]<br />

% Men Women<br />

Base – all trips by Londoners<br />

Shopp<strong>in</strong>g/personal bus<strong>in</strong>ess 21 27<br />

Leisure 23 23<br />

Education 16 21<br />

Usual workplace 23 17<br />

Other work-related 11 5<br />

Other 6 7<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Transport for London – Women 88


Women<br />

Ticket types<br />

There is little difference between how women and men use tickets and passes<br />

when <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g on public transport. For <strong>in</strong>stance, women and men are just as<br />

likely to use Oyster PAYG on public transport (59 per cent of women compared<br />

with 58 per cent of men), which is by far the most popular payment method.<br />

Similarly, there is little difference between the use of other tickets and passes ong<br />

men and women [32].<br />

Tickets and passes used on public transport (January 2015) [32]<br />

% Men Women<br />

Base: Public transport users: (378) (597)<br />

Oyster PAYG 58 59<br />

Oyster Season ticket 19 21<br />

Contactless payment 15 17<br />

Cash/s<strong>in</strong>gle/return 11 9<br />

Any other Travelcard 7 8<br />

Freedom Pass 21 21<br />

Travelcards<br />

Sixty per cent of women have an Oyster card, which is <strong>in</strong> l<strong>in</strong>e with the proportion<br />

of men who possess one (59 per cent) [12].<br />

Ticket types held (2013/14) [12]<br />

% Men Women<br />

Base (7,518) (8,182)<br />

Oyster card 59 60<br />

Older person’s Freedom Pass 14 17<br />

Disabled person’s Freedom Pass 2 2<br />

Staff/police pass 2 1<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

A slightly greater proportion of women than men hold an older person’s Freedom<br />

Pass (17 per cent of women compared with 14 per cent of men). The same<br />

proportion of women and men hold a disabled person’s Freedom Pass (two per<br />

cent each) [12].<br />

Transport for London – Women 89


Women<br />

Barriers<br />

Barriers to greater public transport use<br />

There are a number of potential barriers that can prevent Londoners from us<strong>in</strong>g<br />

public transport more frequently. When presented with a list of these, women are<br />

more likely than men to say that at least one issue prevents them from <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g<br />

their use of public transport (84 per cent of women compared with 81 per cent of<br />

men mention at least one barrier) [14].<br />

The most commonly cited barrier for women and men is overcrowd<strong>in</strong>g on<br />

transport services, which is a bigger issue for women (60 per cent of women<br />

compared with 56 per cent of men). The second most common barrier relates to<br />

the cost of tickets, which is also a bigger issue for women than men (47 per cent of<br />

women compared with 43 per cent of men) [14].<br />

Women are more likely than men to mention barriers relat<strong>in</strong>g to crime and<br />

personal safety. In particular, they are more <strong>in</strong>cl<strong>in</strong>ed to say that each of the<br />

follow<strong>in</strong>g prevents them from us<strong>in</strong>g public transport more:<br />

Fear of crime on the bus/tra<strong>in</strong> and gett<strong>in</strong>g to the bus/tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Concern about antisocial behavi<strong>our</strong><br />

Concern about knife crime<br />

Fear of terrorist attacks<br />

Risk of accidents [14]<br />

Barriers to us<strong>in</strong>g public transport more often (prompted) (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]<br />

% Men Women<br />

Base (1,619) (2,386)<br />

Overcrowded services 56 60<br />

Cost of tickets 43 47<br />

Slow j<strong>our</strong>ney times 40 41<br />

Unreliable services 34 39<br />

Concern about antisocial behavi<strong>our</strong> 30 38<br />

Dirty environment on the bus/tra<strong>in</strong> 25 30<br />

Fear of crime gett<strong>in</strong>g to/ wait<strong>in</strong>g for the bus/tra<strong>in</strong> 17 30<br />

Fear of crime on the bus/tra<strong>in</strong> 16 28<br />

Concern about knife crime 16 24<br />

Dirty environment gett<strong>in</strong>g to the bus/tra<strong>in</strong> 16 20<br />

Fear of terrorist attacks 8 16<br />

Risk of accidents 5 12<br />

Lack of <strong>in</strong>formation on how to use public transport 9 11<br />

Graffiti 10 10<br />

Don’t understand how to buy bus tickets 4 6<br />

None of these 19 16<br />

Transport for London – Women 90


Women<br />

Women are more likely than men to be <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g with buggies and/or shopp<strong>in</strong>g,<br />

and to be <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g with children. For this reason, the car is often seen as a<br />

convenient type of transport, present<strong>in</strong>g less of a challenge to <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g when<br />

laden down. However, <strong>our</strong> qualitative research <strong>in</strong>dicates that the cost and stress<br />

associated with driv<strong>in</strong>g enc<strong>our</strong>ages some people to use public transport –<br />

particularly the bus, which is perceived to be more child-friendly and educational<br />

than other types of transport such as the Tube [35].<br />

Tube<br />

Presently people make only a small number of trips on the Tube with buggies. We<br />

assume that people are put off because of accessibility issues [40]. In research that<br />

we carried out <strong>in</strong> 2012 with people <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g with restricted mobility (PRM), we<br />

found that not all disabled customers or customers <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g with children 3 or<br />

luggage made use of lifts available <strong>in</strong> Underground stations. Forty-eight per cent<br />

of women <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g with children planned their j<strong>our</strong>ney with access to a lift <strong>in</strong><br />

m<strong>in</strong>d, significantly higher than the PRM sample overall (29 per cent). When we<br />

asked people to rank the Tube for accessibility on a scale of 0–10, 28 per cent of<br />

women <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g as a PRM ranked it good to excellent (8-10), consistent with the<br />

overall result (29 per cent) [41].<br />

Bus<br />

Travell<strong>in</strong>g by bus with a buggy and/or children is often stressful for women and<br />

presents potential issues with other passengers and drivers. Some buggy users<br />

make use of the wheelchair priority area on buses. We have conducted research<br />

around this area <strong>in</strong> recent years as part of a communications programme relat<strong>in</strong>g<br />

to the use of this space [BP, 43].<br />

3 Travell<strong>in</strong>g with children is def<strong>in</strong>ed as those <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g with children aged under five or with<br />

a pram/buggy [38].<br />

Transport for London – Women 91


Women<br />

Case study: Travell<strong>in</strong>g with buggies on the bus 4<br />

Travell<strong>in</strong>g with children and buggies can present a stressful challenge at times for women.<br />

The experience of people <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g with buggies on the bus depends on a number of<br />

factors: how frequently they do so, the time of <strong>travel</strong> (and therefore how crowded the bus<br />

is), the bus design, the age of the child/children and the number of children <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the<br />

group [BP, 43].<br />

Many customers have experienced difficulties when <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g with buggies on the bus.<br />

These difficulties <strong>in</strong>clude crowd<strong>in</strong>g on buses, negative attitudes of other passengers,<br />

negotiat<strong>in</strong>g gett<strong>in</strong>g on and off the bus and drivers refus<strong>in</strong>g to allow buggies on the bus [43].<br />

Additionally, women <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g with buggies mention practical issues that can be<br />

problematic, such as mov<strong>in</strong>g the buggy around the pole to reach the wheelchair priority<br />

area, and drivers park<strong>in</strong>g too far away from the kerb [44].<br />

‘I feel guilty stand<strong>in</strong>g there with the child <strong>in</strong> the pram. I’m always apologis<strong>in</strong>g, gett<strong>in</strong>g the<br />

pram, pull<strong>in</strong>g it over to let people go past…I just feel like I shouldn’t be on [the bus]. I feel<br />

like it is a h<strong>in</strong>drance.’ (Woman, buggy user) [42]<br />

Buggy users’ concerns and anxieties [43]<br />

In terms of the <strong>travel</strong> experiences of buggy users, customers reported that <strong>in</strong>consistent<br />

experiences surround<strong>in</strong>g the space and driver approaches are the major cause of stress for<br />

buggy and wheelchair users, and recommended clarification on 'the rules' for all customers<br />

and drivers [43]. This feedback helped to <strong>in</strong>form the <strong>in</strong>formation campaign that we<br />

launched.<br />

4 We have <strong>in</strong>cluded more <strong>in</strong>formation <strong>in</strong> the disabled customer chapter about the experiences of wheelchair<br />

users.<br />

Transport for London – Women 92


Women<br />

Safety and security<br />

We use a typology of worry to monitor the perceptions of Londoners with regard<br />

to their personal security while us<strong>in</strong>g public transport <strong>in</strong> London. The typology<br />

classifies people <strong>in</strong>to:<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

Unworried – reports no general worry and no episodes of recent worry<br />

Unexpressed fear – reports no general worry, but specific recent episodes<br />

Anxious – reports general worry, but no specific recent episodes<br />

Worried – reports general worry, and specific recent episodes<br />

Don’t know<br />

The majority of Londoners fall <strong>in</strong>to the ‘unworried’ category, which means that<br />

they are generally unworried about their personal security <strong>in</strong> London and have<br />

experienced no <strong>in</strong>cidents that made them feel worried <strong>in</strong> the last three months.<br />

However, a significantly lower proportion of London’s women are considered<br />

‘unworried’ than men (70 per cent of women are ‘unworried’ compared with 81 per<br />

cent of men) [14].<br />

Typology of worry (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]<br />

% Men Women<br />

Base (1,619) (2,386)<br />

Unworried 81 70<br />

Unexpressed 10 12<br />

Anxious 3 8<br />

Worried 4 7<br />

Don’t know 2 3<br />

Women liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> London are considerably less likely than men to say that they are<br />

‘not at all worried’ about personal security while us<strong>in</strong>g public transport. They are<br />

also more likely to report that they are ‘very worried’ [14].<br />

Levels of concern about personal security when us<strong>in</strong>g public transport <strong>in</strong> London (Jan/<br />

Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]<br />

% Men Women<br />

Base (1,619) (2,386)<br />

Not at all worried 51 34<br />

A little bit worried 41 48<br />

Quite a bit worried 5 12<br />

Very worried 2 4<br />

Don’t know 1 2<br />

Transport for London – Women 93


Women<br />

A higher proportion of women than men take precautions aga<strong>in</strong>st crime when<br />

us<strong>in</strong>g public transport (42 per cent of women compared with 35 per cent of men).<br />

The most common precaution for women is to sit by other people (39 per cent),<br />

whereas for men it is to look after their belong<strong>in</strong>gs (31 per cent). For women, the<br />

next most common precautions are to <strong>travel</strong> with someone else and to look after<br />

their belong<strong>in</strong>gs (both 28 per cent), whereas for men it is to sit by other people (28<br />

per cent) [14].<br />

Precautions taken (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]<br />

% All Men Women<br />

Base (all who take precautions) (1,507) (536) (971)<br />

Sat near to other people 34 28 39<br />

Look after my belong<strong>in</strong>gs 29 31 28<br />

Travelled with someone else 23 18 28<br />

Travel at a different time of day 16 14 18<br />

Used a different route 15 15 15<br />

Stay aware/vigilant 15 21 10<br />

Avoided us<strong>in</strong>g that type of transport 12 9 15<br />

Only take necessities with me 3 2 5<br />

Carry a personal alarm 3 1 5<br />

Note that responses 2% or below among all Londoners are not shown.<br />

In terms of actual experiences, the proportion of women who have felt worried<br />

about their personal security when us<strong>in</strong>g public transport <strong>in</strong> London <strong>in</strong> the past<br />

three months is higher than men (19 per cent of women compared with 14 per<br />

cent of men). Women are also more likely than men to experience an episode of<br />

worry dur<strong>in</strong>g the daytime. Women’s most recent experience of worry is roughly<br />

equally split between day and night-time events (45 per cent daytime compared<br />

with 54 per cent night-time) whereas when men experience an episode of worry,<br />

this is more likely to occur at night (33 per cent daytime compared with 65 per cent<br />

night-time) [14].<br />

We asked people who have felt worried about their personal security when us<strong>in</strong>g<br />

public transport <strong>in</strong> the last three months which type of transport they were us<strong>in</strong>g<br />

when they experienced this event. For women and men who experienced a<br />

worry<strong>in</strong>g event on public transport <strong>in</strong> the past three months, the most likely type<br />

of transport on which the event occurred was the bus (48 per cent of women and<br />

men who felt worried <strong>in</strong> the last three months were on the bus). It is important to<br />

note this reflects the higher use of buses by Londoners compared with Tube or<br />

tra<strong>in</strong>. Women and men were also just as likely to experience worry on the Tube<br />

(both 30 per cent <strong>in</strong> the past three months) [14].<br />

Concerns about crime and antisocial behavi<strong>our</strong> affect how frequently people <strong>travel</strong><br />

on the Tube, bus or National Rail ‘a little’ or ‘a lot’ for slightly more than half of<br />

Londoners (53 per cent). Women are affected to a greater extent than men: 61 per<br />

Transport for London – Women 94


Women<br />

cent of women report that the frequency with which they use the Tube, buses or<br />

National Rail is affected ‘a little’ or ‘a lot’ because of concerns over crime or<br />

antisocial behavi<strong>our</strong> compared to 43 per cent of men [14].<br />

A higher proportion of women are affected <strong>in</strong> terms of their public transport <strong>travel</strong><br />

frequency because of these concerns across all three types of transport (Tube, bus,<br />

National Rail) both dur<strong>in</strong>g the day and at night [14].<br />

Proportion of Londoners for whom concerns over crime/antisocial behavi<strong>our</strong> affect the<br />

frequency of their public transport use ‘a lot/a little’ (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]<br />

% All Men Women<br />

Base (4,005) (1619) (2386)<br />

Overall: Dur<strong>in</strong>g the day/after dark<br />

Underground/buses/National Rail 53 43 61<br />

Dur<strong>in</strong>g the day:<br />

Underground/buses/National Rail 22 18 26<br />

Underground 16 12 20<br />

Buses 17 13 21<br />

National Rail 11 8 14<br />

After dark:<br />

Underground/buses/National Rail 49 40 57<br />

Underground 37 27 46<br />

Buses 42 35 50<br />

National Rail 29 21 37<br />

Project Guardian<br />

In 2014 TfL, the Metropolitan Police Service and the British Transport Police launched<br />

Project Guardian to raise public awareness of unwanted sexual behavi<strong>our</strong> on the transport<br />

network. This <strong>in</strong>itiative focuses on enc<strong>our</strong>ag<strong>in</strong>g victims to report these types of crimes –<br />

which are historically significantly underreported - alongside more proactive police<br />

enforcement and engagement. We have been supported by stakeholders that <strong>in</strong>clude<br />

Everyday Sexism, End Violence Aga<strong>in</strong>st Women Coalition and HollaBack UK, and the<br />

project has resulted <strong>in</strong> a 16 per cent <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> the reports of unwanted sexual behavi<strong>our</strong><br />

on the transport network, and a 25 per cent <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> the detection of crimes of this<br />

nature.<br />

Among Londoners who are will<strong>in</strong>g to answer questions about their experiences of<br />

unwanted sexual behavi<strong>our</strong> while <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g around the city, 11 per cent of women report<br />

experienc<strong>in</strong>g some form of unwelcome sexual behavi<strong>our</strong>, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g sexual harassment or<br />

sexual assault, while <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g on, wait<strong>in</strong>g for, or head<strong>in</strong>g to/from public transport <strong>in</strong><br />

London <strong>in</strong> the previous year (the equivalent figure for men is two per cent). A range of<br />

unwanted sexual behavi<strong>our</strong>s are reported by Londoners, the most common be<strong>in</strong>g grop<strong>in</strong>g<br />

or touch<strong>in</strong>g, sexual comments and star<strong>in</strong>g [14].<br />

Transport for London – Women 95


Women<br />

A very low proportion of unwanted sexual behavi<strong>our</strong> is reported. There are a number of<br />

theories as to why, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g a socio-cultural model that sees harassment as a wider<br />

manifestation of a system of asymmetrical power relationships between women and men.<br />

Research also suggests that men can mistakenly view unwanted sexual behavi<strong>our</strong> as<br />

harmless, thereby mak<strong>in</strong>g it more commonplace, even though to women it is often<br />

threaten<strong>in</strong>g and therefore harmful.<br />

Women who experience unwanted sexual behavi<strong>our</strong> tend to employ the follow<strong>in</strong>g cop<strong>in</strong>g<br />

strategies:<br />

<br />

<br />

Internal (psychological): endure, normalise/m<strong>in</strong>imise – ‘you just have to put up with it’,<br />

deny, re<strong>in</strong>terpret, self-blame<br />

External (problem-solv<strong>in</strong>g): avoid, change behavi<strong>our</strong> (for example, walk to work a<br />

different way), appease (for example, hum<strong>our</strong>), seek social support, assert, attack,<br />

make a formal compla<strong>in</strong>t<br />

F<strong>our</strong> barriers appear to prevent Londoners report<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>cidents of unwanted sexual<br />

behavi<strong>our</strong> while <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> London to TfL or the police:<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

Normalisation: unwanted sexual behavi<strong>our</strong>s are normalised, experiences are generally<br />

ignored. They are viewed as a social nuisance and as part of a wider spectrum of<br />

antisocial behavi<strong>our</strong><br />

Internalisation: the report<strong>in</strong>g process can be at odds with what someone who has<br />

experienced unwanted sexual behavi<strong>our</strong> may need. Firstly, there is often a need to<br />

<strong>in</strong>ternalise the situation, escape and forget about the <strong>in</strong>cident as quickly as possible.<br />

Secondly, there is frequently a need to seek empathy, support and validation from<br />

someone who cares<br />

Lack of awareness: most people are unaware that a report<strong>in</strong>g process exists. They are<br />

unclear about what behavi<strong>our</strong>s warrant action, who to tell and what the process will<br />

entail<br />

Credibility: very few people believe that report<strong>in</strong>g an unwanted sexual behavi<strong>our</strong> will<br />

result <strong>in</strong> any form of justice<br />

Our research has identified a number of key recommendations <strong>in</strong> this area which can help<br />

TfL and other organisations to enc<strong>our</strong>age greater report<strong>in</strong>g [45].<br />

Transport for London – Women 96


Women<br />

Safer Travel at Night (STaN) campaign: the use of illegal (unbooked) m<strong>in</strong>icabs<br />

TfL has run the Safer Travel at Night (STaN) campaign s<strong>in</strong>ce 2003, with the aim of<br />

reduc<strong>in</strong>g the use of illegal (unbooked) m<strong>in</strong>icabs. We have targeted <strong>our</strong><br />

communication campaigns at young women aged between 16 and 34 <strong>in</strong> particular<br />

[36].<br />

We conduct research on an annual basis to monitor the use of unbooked m<strong>in</strong>icabs<br />

among <strong>our</strong> target audience, and we also evaluate <strong>our</strong> communications campaign<br />

to determ<strong>in</strong>e its effectiveness.<br />

STaN campaign posters<br />

S<strong>in</strong>ce we began to monitor the use of unbooked m<strong>in</strong>icabs among users of late<br />

night venues <strong>in</strong> London, there has been a significant decl<strong>in</strong>e <strong>in</strong> their use. Among<br />

women aged 16-34, two per cent used an unbooked m<strong>in</strong>icab to reach their onward<br />

dest<strong>in</strong>ation on the night of the research <strong>in</strong> 2015, compared with 19 per cent <strong>in</strong><br />

2003. In 2015 this was down to zero amongst women [36].<br />

Women and men have different views on us<strong>in</strong>g unbooked m<strong>in</strong>icabs. While 26 per<br />

cent of men say they are likely to use an illegal m<strong>in</strong>icab <strong>in</strong> future, the figure is<br />

much lower at 13 per cent among women (also 13 per cent for women aged 16-34)<br />

[36].<br />

Further to the reduction <strong>in</strong> the use of unbooked m<strong>in</strong>icabs, <strong>in</strong>itiatives by the TfLfunded<br />

Metropolitan Police Service's Safer Transport Command (STC) and City of<br />

London Police (CoLP) are help<strong>in</strong>g to remove taxi touts from the streets. In a<br />

targeted <strong>in</strong>itiative at the end of 2013, more than 170 arrests were made for cabrelated<br />

offences dur<strong>in</strong>g two crackdowns as part of Operation Safer Travel at Night<br />

[46].<br />

The use of illegal (unbooked) m<strong>in</strong>icabs (2014) [36]<br />

% Use of illegal m<strong>in</strong>icabs Men Women Women<br />

(all ages) (16-34)<br />

Base (324) (327) (288)<br />

Used an illegal m<strong>in</strong>icab to reach onward dest<strong>in</strong>ation 2 - -<br />

on night of <strong>in</strong>terview<br />

Likely to use illegal m<strong>in</strong>icab <strong>in</strong> future 26 13 13<br />

Unlikely to use illegal m<strong>in</strong>icab <strong>in</strong> future 74 87 87<br />

Transport for London – Women 97


Women<br />

Customer satisfaction<br />

We measure overall satisfaction with various transport types <strong>in</strong> London us<strong>in</strong>g an<br />

11-po<strong>in</strong>t scale, with 10 represent<strong>in</strong>g extremely satisfied and zero represent<strong>in</strong>g<br />

extremely dissatisfied. We then scale this up to 100.<br />

Our standardised satisfaction rat<strong>in</strong>gs are shown <strong>in</strong> the table below. This allows us<br />

to apply consistent analysis across a wide range of satisfaction research.<br />

Average rat<strong>in</strong>g Level of satisfaction<br />

Under 50<br />

Very low/weak/poor<br />

50-54 Low/weak/poor<br />

55-64 Fairly/relatively/quite low/weak/poor<br />

65-69 Fair/reasonable<br />

70-79 Fairly/relatively/quite good<br />

80-84 Good or fairly high<br />

85-90 Very good or high<br />

90+ Excellent or very high<br />

Satisfaction levels are very similar between women and men. Only a few areas<br />

have differences of more than two po<strong>in</strong>ts out of 100:<br />

<br />

<br />

Women are slightly more satisfied than men with Dial-a-Ride (92 per cent<br />

compared with 89 per cent)<br />

Women are slightly more satisfied than men with the Woolwich Ferry (83 per<br />

cent compared with 80 per cent)<br />

Transport for London – Women 98


Women<br />

Overall satisfaction with transport types (2013/14) – all customers [16]<br />

Satisfaction score (0-100) All Men Women<br />

Bus services<br />

Base (14,155) (6,283) (7,872)<br />

Satisfaction score 85 85 85<br />

Bus stations<br />

Base (3,626) (1,544) (2,082)<br />

Satisfaction score 78 79 78<br />

Night buses<br />

Base (910) (616) (294)<br />

Satisfaction score 81 81 81<br />

Underground<br />

Base (17,634) (7,940) (9,694)<br />

Satisfaction score 84 84 85<br />

Overground<br />

Base (5,397) (2,782) (2,615)<br />

Satisfaction score 83 82 83<br />

DLR<br />

Base (13,398) (7,461) (5,937)<br />

Satisfaction score 89 88 89<br />

Dial-a-Ride<br />

Base (2,572) (394) (2,175)<br />

Satisfaction score 92 89 92<br />

London River Services<br />

Base (2,106) (1,131) (975)<br />

Satisfaction score 90 90 90<br />

Private Hire Vehicles<br />

Base (439) (149) (290)<br />

Satisfaction score 80 81 79<br />

Taxis<br />

Base (569) (275) (294)<br />

Satisfaction score 83 83 84<br />

Trams<br />

Base (4,329) (2,069) (2,260)<br />

Satisfaction score 89 89 90<br />

Victoria Coach Station<br />

Base (1,204) (608) (596)<br />

Satisfaction score 82 82 81<br />

Woolwich Ferry<br />

Base (1,056) (732) (231)<br />

Satisfaction score 79 80 83<br />

Transport for London – Women 99


Score out of 100<br />

Women<br />

Bus<br />

Overall satisfaction among bus users is high at 85 out of 100, and both women and<br />

men give the same rat<strong>in</strong>g [16].<br />

The long-term trend for bus users <strong>in</strong> London shows a consistent improvement <strong>in</strong><br />

the rat<strong>in</strong>gs of overall satisfaction for both women and men [16].<br />

Overall satisfaction with buses over time [16]<br />

100<br />

90<br />

80<br />

70<br />

76 77 78 78 78 80 80 80 80 80 82 83<br />

76 77 78 77<br />

79 80<br />

77<br />

79 79 80<br />

83 83<br />

85<br />

85<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

Men<br />

Women<br />

Transport for London – Women 100


Score out of 100<br />

Women<br />

As we have found across all types of transport, satisfaction with value for money<br />

of the bus is lower than overall satisfaction. The satisfaction rat<strong>in</strong>g for value for<br />

money is 72 out of 100 for women and 73 out of 100 for men [16].<br />

Satisfaction with value for money of buses has returned to a relatively flat longterm<br />

trend after a couple of lower rat<strong>in</strong>gs observed for women and men <strong>in</strong> recent<br />

years. There is no discernible difference with the satisfaction of value for money<br />

between women and men [16].<br />

Satisfaction with value for money with buses over time [16]<br />

100<br />

90<br />

80<br />

70<br />

60<br />

78 77<br />

78 77<br />

72 71 71<br />

73 73<br />

71<br />

74 74 73<br />

73 74 73<br />

70<br />

66<br />

68 67<br />

68<br />

67<br />

71<br />

73<br />

71 72<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

Drivers of satisfaction<br />

Men<br />

Women<br />

J<strong>our</strong>ney time and ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g a j<strong>our</strong>ney are key drivers of satisfaction with buses for<br />

women and men. Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g the j<strong>our</strong>ney is the ma<strong>in</strong> driver for women, whereas<br />

<strong>in</strong>formation on delays at the stop is the ma<strong>in</strong> driver for men [16].<br />

Drivers of satisfaction for bus users [16]<br />

Men<br />

Satisfaction with <strong>in</strong>fo on delays at stop<br />

J<strong>our</strong>ney time<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Time waited to catch bus<br />

Driver approachability and helpfulness<br />

Women<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

J<strong>our</strong>ney time<br />

Comfort <strong>in</strong>side the bus<br />

Safety and security<br />

Level of crowd<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Transport for London – Women 101


Women<br />

Tube<br />

Overall satisfaction with the Tube among women <strong>in</strong> London is fairly high at 85 out<br />

of 100. This is <strong>in</strong> l<strong>in</strong>e with men’s satisfaction level (84 out of 100) [16].<br />

Long-term trends for Tube satisfaction show that levels of overall satisfaction<br />

have risen ten po<strong>in</strong>ts over the last twelve years. They have been fairly stable over<br />

the last three years [16].<br />

Overall satisfaction with the Tube over time [16]<br />

100<br />

90<br />

80<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

75 77 78 79 77 77 80 80 79 80<br />

74 76 77 77 76 76 79 79 78 80<br />

84 83 85<br />

83 82 84<br />

Men<br />

Women<br />

Transport for London – Women 102


Women<br />

Satisfaction with value for money of the Tube is lower than overall satisfaction<br />

rat<strong>in</strong>gs. Women rate their satisfaction with value for money slightly lower than<br />

men do, giv<strong>in</strong>g a rat<strong>in</strong>g of 68 out of 100 compared with 70 out of 100 by men [16].<br />

Satisfaction with value for money with the Tube over time [16]<br />

100<br />

90<br />

0<br />

1<br />

f<br />

o<br />

t<br />

u<br />

o<br />

re<br />

o<br />

c<br />

S<br />

80<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

64 65 64 62 62 64 66 68 65 64<br />

63 63 61 61 60 62<br />

65 66 65<br />

61<br />

67 68 70<br />

66 66 68<br />

Men<br />

Women<br />

Satisfaction rat<strong>in</strong>gs are very similar between women and men for all measures<br />

covered <strong>in</strong> the research (for example, level of crowd<strong>in</strong>g, personal safety) [16].<br />

Drivers of satisfaction<br />

Among women and men who use the Tube, overall satisfaction is related to the<br />

same ma<strong>in</strong> drivers: ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g the j<strong>our</strong>ney, comfort of j<strong>our</strong>ney, length of<br />

j<strong>our</strong>ney time and length of time wait<strong>in</strong>g for tra<strong>in</strong>. Men are slightly more likely to<br />

prioritise tra<strong>in</strong> crowd<strong>in</strong>g (the f<strong>our</strong>th most important driver of overall satisfaction),<br />

whereas women are more likely to prioritise personal safety on the tra<strong>in</strong> [16].<br />

Drivers of satisfaction for Tube users [16]<br />

Men<br />

Length of j<strong>our</strong>ney time<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Comfort of j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Tra<strong>in</strong> crowd<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Length of time wait<strong>in</strong>g for tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Women<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Comfort of j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Length of j<strong>our</strong>ney time<br />

Personal safety on tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Length of time wait<strong>in</strong>g for tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Transport for London – Women 103


Women<br />

Overground<br />

Women on the whole are satisfied with the London Overground service at 83 out<br />

of 100. Men also give a similar overall rat<strong>in</strong>g (82 out of 100) [16].<br />

Women and men give very similar satisfaction rat<strong>in</strong>gs for each of the service<br />

elements that we monitor. Women and men are fairly satisfied with their personal<br />

safety when us<strong>in</strong>g the Overground, both rat<strong>in</strong>g their satisfaction as 88 out of 100<br />

[16].<br />

Overall satisfaction with London Overground over time – all customers [16]<br />

Satisfaction score All Men Women<br />

(0-100)<br />

Base 2014/15 (5,397) (2,782) (2,615)<br />

2009/10 73 73 73<br />

2010/11 80 80 82<br />

2011/12 82 81 82<br />

2012/13 82 82 82<br />

2013/14 82 82 83<br />

2014/15 83 82 83<br />

Satisfaction with value for money of London Overground is high at 73 out of 100<br />

among women who use the service (men give a rat<strong>in</strong>g of 72 out of 100) [16].<br />

Satisfaction with value for money with London Overground over time – all customers [16]<br />

Satisfaction score All Men Women<br />

(0-100)<br />

Base 2014/15 (5,182) (2,678) (2,504)<br />

2011/12 72 72 71<br />

2012/13 71 71 70<br />

2013/14 70 70 71<br />

2014/15 73 72 73<br />

Drivers of satisfaction<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g a j<strong>our</strong>ney is the biggest driver of overall satisfaction for women<br />

when us<strong>in</strong>g London Overground, whereas feel<strong>in</strong>g valued as a customer is the<br />

biggest driver for men. How well <strong>in</strong>formation meets needs is the second biggest<br />

driver for women, whereas for men it’s about the ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g a j<strong>our</strong>ney [16].<br />

Transport for London – Women 104


Women<br />

The ma<strong>in</strong> drivers of overall satisfaction are:<br />

Drivers of satisfaction for Overground users [16]<br />

Men<br />

Feel valued as a customer<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Condition and state of repair on tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Comfort of tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Information about service disruptions on the<br />

tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Women<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

How well the <strong>in</strong>formation or assistance meet<br />

needs<br />

Ease of f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>formation at station<br />

Condition and state of repair of the tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Comfort of tra<strong>in</strong><br />

DLR<br />

Overall satisfaction with the DLR is very good/high among women at 89 out of 100<br />

(compared with 88 out of 100 for men) [16].<br />

Overall satisfaction with DLR over time – all customers [16]<br />

Satisfaction score All Men Women<br />

(0-100)<br />

Base 2014/15 (13,398) (7,461) (5,937)<br />

2009/10 81 81 81<br />

2010/11 81 81 82<br />

2011/12 82 82 83<br />

2012/13 87 86 87<br />

2013/14 87 86 88<br />

2014/15 89 88 89<br />

As with other types of transport, we have observed no real differences <strong>in</strong><br />

satisfaction rat<strong>in</strong>gs with the service between women and men us<strong>in</strong>g the DLR [16].<br />

Satisfaction with value for money of the DLR among women is higher than other<br />

types of transport at 77 out of 100, and the same rat<strong>in</strong>g is given by men [16].<br />

Satisfaction with value for money with DLR over time – all customers [16]<br />

Satisfaction score All Men Women<br />

(0-100)<br />

Base 2014/15 (12,839) (7,165) (5,674)<br />

2011/12 72 72 72<br />

2013/14 75 75 75<br />

2014/15 77 77 77<br />

Transport for London – Women 105


Women<br />

Drivers of satisfaction<br />

The top drivers of overall satisfaction with the DLR are similar for women and<br />

men, although women focus slightly more on how issues with us<strong>in</strong>g tickets were<br />

resolved, whereas men are more focused on the reliability of tra<strong>in</strong>s [16]. The ma<strong>in</strong><br />

drivers of satisfaction are:<br />

Drivers of satisfaction for DLR users [16]<br />

Men<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Reliability of tra<strong>in</strong>s<br />

Comfort <strong>in</strong>side the tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Length of time j<strong>our</strong>ney took<br />

Feel valued as a customer<br />

Women<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

How issues us<strong>in</strong>g ticket were resolved<br />

Comfort <strong>in</strong>side the tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Length of time j<strong>our</strong>ney took<br />

Reliability of tra<strong>in</strong>s<br />

Trams<br />

Overall satisfaction with trams is high among customers at 89 out of 100. This is<br />

slightly higher among women than men (90 out of 100 for women compared with<br />

89 out of 100 for men) [16].<br />

Overall satisfaction with trams over time – all customers [16]<br />

Satisfaction score All Men Women<br />

(0-100)<br />

Base 2014/15 (4,329) (2,069) (2,260)<br />

2009/10 86 85 88<br />

2010/11 85 86 85<br />

2011/12 86 86 86<br />

2012/13 89 88 90<br />

2013/14 89 88 90<br />

2014/15 89 89 90<br />

* Denotes small base size (percentages not shown <strong>in</strong> this report for base sizes of less than 50).<br />

Overall satisfaction with value for money on the tram network is quite good (78<br />

out of 100) but it is slightly lower for women than men (77 out of 100 for women<br />

compared with 79 out of 100 for men) [16].<br />

Satisfaction with value for money with trams over time – all customers [16]<br />

Satisfaction score All Men Women<br />

(0-100)<br />

Base 2014/15 (2,824) (1,353) (1,471)<br />

2011/12 73 73 73<br />

2012/13 78 77 78<br />

2013/14 78 79 78<br />

2014/15 78 79 77<br />

* Denotes small base size (percentages not shown <strong>in</strong> this report for base sizes of less than 50).<br />

Transport for London – Women 106


Women<br />

Streets<br />

Women are significantly less likely than men to be satisfied with the streets and<br />

pavements after their last j<strong>our</strong>ney by foot (65 per cent of women were satisfied<br />

compared with 72 per cent of men) [34].<br />

Fifty-n<strong>in</strong>e per cent of women are satisfied with the streets for their last car j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

(the equivalent figure for men is 61 per cent and the difference is not statistically<br />

significant) [34].<br />

Forty-six per cent of all Londoners are satisfied with their last cycl<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney.<br />

Women are less satisfied compared to men (39 per cent of women compared with<br />

50 per cent of men).<br />

Please note that satisfaction for streets is calculated as a comb<strong>in</strong>ation of ‘very<br />

satisfied’ and ‘fairly satisfied’ rather than the 11 po<strong>in</strong>t scale that we have used for<br />

other transport types.<br />

Overall satisfaction with streets and pavement after last j<strong>our</strong>ney – walk<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney [34]<br />

Net fairly<br />

All Men Women<br />

satisfied/very<br />

satisfied (%)<br />

Base 2014/15 (957) (379) (578)<br />

2011 64 66 62<br />

2012 68 71 65<br />

2013 69 72 67<br />

2014 68 73 63<br />

2015 68 72 65<br />

Overall satisfaction with streets and pavement after last j<strong>our</strong>ney over time - car j<strong>our</strong>ney [34]<br />

Net fairly<br />

All Men Women<br />

satisfied/very<br />

satisfied (%)<br />

Base 2014/15 (830) (333) (497)<br />

2011 54 57 52<br />

2012 62 60 64<br />

2013 57 58 56<br />

2014 61 62 59<br />

2015 60 61 59<br />

Transport for London – Women 107


Women<br />

Overall satisfaction with streets and pavement after last j<strong>our</strong>ney over time - cycl<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney [34]<br />

Net fairly<br />

All Men Women<br />

satisfied/very<br />

satisfied (%)<br />

Base 2014/15 (357) (187) (170)<br />

2011 49 49 49<br />

2012 55 55 56<br />

2013 51 51 52<br />

2014 54 57 51<br />

2015 46 50 39<br />

Seventeen per cent of women have walked <strong>in</strong> London with a pram or pushchair<br />

(compared to 11 per cent of men) and among these women 11 per cent th<strong>in</strong>k that<br />

it is easier to walk around London with a pram or pushchair this year than last<br />

(although 14 per cent th<strong>in</strong>k that it has become more difficult) [34].<br />

Transport for London – Women 108


Women<br />

Transport for London Road Network (TRLN)<br />

Satisfaction with the TLRN is reasonable to fairly good. Women users of the TLRN<br />

give a score of 69 out of 100 for walk<strong>in</strong>g, 71 out of 100 for <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g by bus and<br />

cycl<strong>in</strong>g on red routes and 68 out of 100 for driv<strong>in</strong>g. There is very little difference<br />

between the rat<strong>in</strong>gs given by women and men [16].<br />

Overall satisfaction – general impression of red routes over time [16]<br />

Satisfaction score (0-100) All Men Women<br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Base 2014-15 (1,254) (591) (663)<br />

2013/14 70 68 71<br />

2014/15 68 66 69<br />

Travell<strong>in</strong>g by bus<br />

Base 2014-15 (4,620) (1,808) (2,812)<br />

2013/14 69 67 72<br />

2014/15 71 70 71<br />

Driv<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Base 2014-15 (3,605) (1,536) (2,069)<br />

2013/14 67 66 71<br />

2014/15 67 65 68<br />

Cycl<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Base 2014-15 (1,838) (1,022) (816)<br />

2013/14 69 68 68<br />

2014/15 70 70 71<br />

Transport for London – Women 109


Women<br />

Access to <strong>in</strong>formation<br />

From <strong>our</strong> research, women are thought to be more cautious <strong>in</strong> their <strong>travel</strong><br />

behavi<strong>our</strong> than men. Our customer segmentation studies (Touchpo<strong>in</strong>ts) suggest<br />

that women are more likely to fit <strong>in</strong>to the categories of ‘<strong>travel</strong> shy’, ‘reassurance<br />

seeker’ and ‘cautious planner’. For all three categories, levels of confidence us<strong>in</strong>g<br />

the public transport network are relatively low (particularly so for people who are<br />

classed as ‘<strong>travel</strong> shy’). As a result, some women may choose to restrict<br />

themselves to familiar j<strong>our</strong>neys where possible or seek advice and <strong>in</strong>formation to<br />

help plan and complete j<strong>our</strong>neys [47].<br />

We provide a wide range of <strong>in</strong>formation s<strong>our</strong>ces. While there are some specific<br />

differences <strong>in</strong> the use of particular <strong>in</strong>formation s<strong>our</strong>ces by women compared to<br />

men (for example, women are more likely than men to use the pocket Tube map -<br />

85 per cent compared with 73 per cent), on the whole, awareness and use of<br />

<strong>in</strong>formation s<strong>our</strong>ces is comparable between women and men [48].<br />

Access to the <strong>in</strong>ternet<br />

N<strong>in</strong>ety-one per cent of women access the <strong>in</strong>ternet, with 88 per cent access<strong>in</strong>g it at<br />

home, 58 per cent ‘on the move’ and 52 per cent at work. The proportion of<br />

women access<strong>in</strong>g the <strong>in</strong>ternet is almost the same as men (93 per cent). However,<br />

men are more likely to access the <strong>in</strong>ternet <strong>in</strong> multiple places [15].<br />

Access<strong>in</strong>g the <strong>in</strong>ternet [15]<br />

% Men Women<br />

Base (809) (1,192)<br />

Any access 93 91<br />

Access at home 91 88<br />

Access ‘on the move’ 63 58<br />

Access at work 60 52<br />

Women use the <strong>in</strong>ternet for a variety of reasons. The top reasons are:<br />

Email (94 per cent of women who access the <strong>in</strong>ternet)<br />

F<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g and s<strong>our</strong>c<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>formation (90 per cent)<br />

Maps and directions (84 per cent)<br />

Buy<strong>in</strong>g goods and services (78 per cent)<br />

Access<strong>in</strong>g live <strong>travel</strong> <strong>in</strong>formation (78 per cent) [15]<br />

Transport for London – Women 110


Women<br />

Overall <strong>in</strong>ternet use is very similar between women and men. However, women<br />

are less likely than men to use the <strong>in</strong>ternet for:<br />

Watch<strong>in</strong>g video content (56 per cent women compared with 69 per cent men)<br />

Bank<strong>in</strong>g (62 per cent women compared with 74 per cent men)<br />

Work-related matters (60 per cent women compared with 70 per cent men)<br />

Contact<strong>in</strong>g companies for customer service (48 per cent women compared<br />

with 57 per cent men) [15]<br />

Seventy per cent of women who access the <strong>in</strong>ternet use it for social network<strong>in</strong>g<br />

(69 per cent of men). The most popular social network<strong>in</strong>g site for both women and<br />

men is Facebook, which is used by 87 per cent of women who use social networks<br />

(and 77 per cent of men).<br />

There are some differences between the social media sites used by women and<br />

men. Men are more likely than women to use YouTube (36 per cent of women who<br />

use social network<strong>in</strong>g compared with 45 per cent of men), Twitter (29 per cent of<br />

women who use social network<strong>in</strong>g compared with 36 per cent of men) and<br />

L<strong>in</strong>kedIn (19 per cent of women who use social network<strong>in</strong>g compared with 31 per<br />

cent of men). Women are more likely to use Instagram than men (29 per cent of<br />

women who use social network<strong>in</strong>g compared with 16 per cent of men) [15].<br />

Device usage and behavi<strong>our</strong><br />

Women and men are equally likely to own a smartphone (76 per cent women<br />

compared with 78 per cent men). Smartphone use has significantly <strong>in</strong>creased over<br />

the last few years (<strong>in</strong> 2010, 55 per cent of women owned a smartphone) [15].<br />

Proportion of Londoners who own a smartphone (iPhone, BlackBerry, other) (April 2014) [15]<br />

% Men Women<br />

Base (809) (1,192)<br />

Uses a smartphone 78 76<br />

Transport for London – Women 111


Women<br />

Us<strong>in</strong>g the TfL website<br />

Seventy-eight per cent of both women and men liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> London access the TfL<br />

website. Twenty-eight per cent of women and 34 per cent of men access the TfL<br />

website three to f<strong>our</strong> times a week or more [15].<br />

Overall, 19 per cent of women <strong>in</strong> London never use the TfL website (compared<br />

with 20 per cent of men) [15].<br />

Proportion of Londoners who use www.tfl.gov.uk [15]<br />

% Men Women<br />

Base (809) (1,192)<br />

Uses TfL website 78 78<br />

Daily 10 10<br />

3-4 times a week 24 18<br />

3-4 times a month 20 20<br />

Once a month 15 18<br />

Less than once a month 10 13<br />

Never 20 19<br />

Don’t know/refused 1 2<br />

Women who use the TfL website are more likely than men to use J<strong>our</strong>ney Planner<br />

(71 per cent of women compared with 62 per cent of men). Women are less likely<br />

than men to visit the website for live <strong>travel</strong> updates (27 per cent of women<br />

compared with 34 per cent of men) or for <strong>in</strong>formation on planned works and<br />

closures (23 per cent of women compared with 25 per cent of men) [37].<br />

Ma<strong>in</strong> purpose of today’s visit to the TfL website (2013) [37]<br />

% Men Women<br />

Base (12,060) (16,217)<br />

Us<strong>in</strong>g J<strong>our</strong>ney Planner to plan a route 62 71<br />

F<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g out live <strong>travel</strong> <strong>in</strong>formation 34 27<br />

F<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g out about planned works or closures 25 23<br />

Do<strong>in</strong>g someth<strong>in</strong>g related to Oyster cards or other tickets 22 19<br />

F<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g a map 16 14<br />

Do<strong>in</strong>g someth<strong>in</strong>g related to Congestion Charge 5 4<br />

F<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g out about cycl<strong>in</strong>g 3 2<br />

F<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g out about roads or driv<strong>in</strong>g 2 2<br />

Other 5 3<br />

Transport for London – Women 112


Women<br />

Access<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>formation <strong>in</strong> the event of <strong>travel</strong> disruption<br />

Women are less likely than men to seek real-time <strong>travel</strong> <strong>in</strong>formation (80 per cent<br />

compared with 85 per cent of men). Fifty per cent of women obta<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong>formation<br />

from staff or announcements/displays about problems or delays on public<br />

transport (compared with 57 per cent of men). Forty-two per cent of women<br />

(compared with 45 per cent of men) get <strong>in</strong>formation from the TfL website and<br />

n<strong>in</strong>e per cent from a non-TfL site that features London <strong>travel</strong> advice (13 per cent<br />

for men) [15].<br />

Seventeen per cent of women use apps to seek real-time <strong>travel</strong> <strong>in</strong>formation on<br />

disruptions compared with 22 per cent of men. People also use social media; f<strong>our</strong><br />

per cent of women use TfL’s Twitter feed and three per cent use another Twitter<br />

feed (the figures for men are five per cent and three per cent respectively) [15].<br />

Transport for London – Women 113


Older People<br />

Summary: Older people<br />

Key f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs<br />

Londoners aged 65 or over make up 11 per cent of London’s population [2]<br />

Older Londoners tend to make fewer weekday j<strong>our</strong>neys (2.3 j<strong>our</strong>neys on average<br />

compared with 2.7 for Londoners overall). This is especially the case among Londoners<br />

aged 70-79 (2.4 j<strong>our</strong>neys) and those aged 80 and over (1.6 j<strong>our</strong>neys) [12]<br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g is the most frequently used type of transport by older Londoners aged 65 and<br />

over (86 per cent walk at least once a week). Sixty-one per cent <strong>travel</strong> by bus, 45 per<br />

cent <strong>travel</strong> by car as a passenger and 45 per cent drive a car at least once a week [12]<br />

Older Londoners tend to give higher overall satisfaction scores for each transport type<br />

than all Londoners [16]<br />

Older Londoners are less likely than Londoners overall to state that their <strong>travel</strong><br />

frequency on buses, Tube or National Rail is affected ‘a lot’ or ‘a little’ by concerns over<br />

crime and antisocial behavi<strong>our</strong> (39 per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over compared<br />

with 53 per cent all Londoners) [14]<br />

Older Londoners are less likely to access the <strong>in</strong>ternet than Londoners overall (64 per<br />

cent of Londoners aged 65 and over compared with 92 per cent of all Londoners) [15]<br />

Older Londoners, aged 65 or over are less likely to use the TfL website than Londoners<br />

overall (47 per cent compared with 78 per cent of all Londoners) [15]<br />

Older Londoners are also less likely to use a smartphone (25 per cent compared with 77<br />

per cent) [15]<br />

Transport for London – Older People 114


Older People<br />

Profile of older Londoners<br />

Londoners aged 65 and over make up 11 per cent of the Capital’s population [2].<br />

Older Londoners have a different demographic profile to the total London<br />

population <strong>in</strong> a number of ways. Compared with all Londoners, people aged 65<br />

and over are more likely to be women (55 per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over<br />

are women compared with 51 per cent of all Londoners), from a white ethnic<br />

group (81 per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over are white compared with 62 per<br />

cent of all Londoners), on an annual household <strong>in</strong>come of less than £20,000 per<br />

year (65 per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over live <strong>in</strong> a lower <strong>in</strong>come household<br />

compared with 36 per cent of all Londoners) and be disabled (37 per cent of<br />

Londoners aged 65 and over are disabled compared with 11 per cent of all<br />

Londoners) [12]. Each of these factors can affect the <strong>travel</strong> behavi<strong>our</strong> and<br />

attitudes of older people <strong>in</strong> London.<br />

Transport behavi<strong>our</strong><br />

Older people tend to <strong>travel</strong> less frequently. Walk<strong>in</strong>g is the most commonly used<br />

transport option by older Londoners; 86 per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over<br />

walk at least once a week. The bus is also a key form of transport for people aged<br />

65 and over, with 61 per cent say<strong>in</strong>g they use the bus at least once a week (the<br />

same amount as for all Londoners) [12].<br />

With the exception of driv<strong>in</strong>g and <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g by bus, older Londoners use all forms<br />

of transport less frequently than the total London population (for example,<br />

walk<strong>in</strong>g 86 per cent compared with 96 per cent overall; Tube 23 per cent<br />

compared with 39 per cent overall) [12].<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

Forty-five per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over drive a car at least once a<br />

week and 45 per cent <strong>travel</strong> by car as a passenger [12]<br />

Around three-quarters of Londoners aged between 65 and 69 hold a full<br />

driv<strong>in</strong>g licence (74 per cent aged between 65 and 69 compared with 64 per cent<br />

all Londoners). This drops considerably for the older age groups (58 per cent<br />

for 70-79 year olds and 38 per cent for 80+) [12]<br />

A similar proportion have access to a car (73 per cent of Londoners aged<br />

between 65 and 69 compared with 65 per cent all Londoners). This drops<br />

considerably for the older age groups (63 per cent for 70-79 year olds and 43<br />

per cent for 80+) [12]<br />

Lower numbers of Londoners aged 65 and over cycle as a means of transport.<br />

Eight per cent sometimes use a bicycle to get around London compared with<br />

17 per cent of the wider London population [17]<br />

Dial-a-Ride members tend to have an older age profile than disabled<br />

Londoners overall; 83 per cent of Dial-a-Ride members are aged 65 or over<br />

compared with 41 per cent of all disabled Londoners [30, AB]<br />

Fifty-two per cent of weekday j<strong>our</strong>neys made by Londoners aged 65 and over<br />

are for shopp<strong>in</strong>g/personal bus<strong>in</strong>ess, while 31 per cent are for leisure purposes<br />

[12]<br />

Transport for London – Older People 115


Older People<br />

Barriers<br />

Many of the barriers to greater public transport use that affect all Londoners are<br />

less likely to impact people aged 65 and over. For example, slow j<strong>our</strong>ney times are<br />

seen as a barrier to <strong>in</strong>creased public transport use for 41 per cent of all Londoners,<br />

but only 18 per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over [14].<br />

The most commonly mentioned barrier to <strong>in</strong>creased public transport use among<br />

older Londoners is concern about overcrowded services (40 per cent of older<br />

Londoners mention overcrowd<strong>in</strong>g compared with 59 per cent of all Londoners)<br />

and concerns around antisocial behavi<strong>our</strong> (34 per cent for both Londoners aged 65<br />

and over and all Londoners) [14].<br />

Londoners aged 65 or over are also more likely to be classified as ‘unworried’ (83<br />

per cent of Londoners aged 65 or over compared with 75 per cent of all Londoners)<br />

and less likely to take precautions aga<strong>in</strong>st be<strong>in</strong>g a victim of crime or antisocial<br />

behavi<strong>our</strong> on public transport (32 per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over<br />

compared with 38 per cent of all Londoners). People <strong>in</strong> this age group are also less<br />

likely to say that concerns over crime or antisocial behavi<strong>our</strong> affect the frequency<br />

of their public transport use ‘a lot’ or ‘a little’ than all Londoners (39 per cent of<br />

Londoners aged 65 or over compared with 53 per cent of all Londoners) [14].<br />

Customer satisfaction<br />

Older customers are more satisfied with all types of transport than customers<br />

overall [16].<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

Overall satisfaction with buses is high at 90 out of 100 (compared with 85 for<br />

customers overall) [16]<br />

Overall satisfaction with the Tube is also high at 89 out of 100 (compared with<br />

84 out of 100 for all customers) [16]<br />

Older Londoners are also more satisfied with value for money than customers<br />

overall [16]<br />

Londoners aged 65 and over are less satisfied with the streets and pavements<br />

on their last walk<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney than Londoners overall (57 per cent compared<br />

with 68 per cent) [34]<br />

Transport for London – Older People 116


Older People<br />

Access to <strong>in</strong>formation<br />

Internet access is lower among Londoners aged 65 and over than Londoners<br />

overall (64 per cent compared with 92 per cent) [15].<br />

<br />

<br />

Use of the TfL website decl<strong>in</strong>es with age: 47 per cent of Londoners aged 65 and<br />

over access the TfL website compared with 78 per cent of all Londoners [15].<br />

Older Londoners who do visit the website do so less frequently than all<br />

Londoners [15]<br />

Similarly, a much lower proportion of older Londoners aged 65 and over use a<br />

smartphone than all Londoners (25 per cent compared with 77 per cent) [15]<br />

Transport for London – Older People 117


Older People<br />

Introduction<br />

People aged 65 and over make up 11 per cent of London’s population, and it is<br />

projected that this proportion will grow over time [2, 18].<br />

For many people, the transition from work<strong>in</strong>g to retirement changes the way that<br />

they use public transport <strong>in</strong> London. J<strong>our</strong>ney purposes shift away from the focus of<br />

work, and j<strong>our</strong>neys tend to be made less frequently.<br />

The focus of this chapter is predom<strong>in</strong>antly on Londoners aged 65 and over. Where<br />

possible, data is shown for the age bands of 65-69, 70-79 and 80+, though other<br />

similar age brackets are used where data is not available.<br />

Note that transport behavi<strong>our</strong>, attitudes and barriers <strong>in</strong> this chapter may well be<br />

<strong>in</strong>fluenced by a number of factors other than age, with disability, gender, <strong>in</strong>come<br />

and education all affect<strong>in</strong>g perceptions towards <strong>travel</strong> <strong>in</strong> London.<br />

Transport for London – Older People 118


Older People<br />

Profile of older people <strong>in</strong> London<br />

Eleven per cent of Londoners are aged 65 and over. Three per cent of the London<br />

population is aged 80 and over [2].<br />

2011 Census – age profile of Londoners [2]<br />

Proportion of age group who are…<br />

% All Men Women<br />

15 and under 20 51 49<br />

16-24 12 50 50<br />

25-59 53 50 50<br />

60-64 4 48 52<br />

65-69 3 47 53<br />

70-79 5 46 54<br />

80+ 3 37 63<br />

Percentage change <strong>in</strong> population of London (1971–2011) [49, AB]<br />

% change 1971–1981 1981–1991 1991–2001 2001–2011<br />

All ages -10 0 +7 +12<br />

0-14 -22 +2 +8 +8<br />

15-64 -8 +2 +10 +17<br />

65+ +4 -8 -7 +1<br />

The proportion of older Londoners is set to grow. The GLA estimate is that by<br />

2040, 15 per cent of London’s population will be aged 65 or over [18].<br />

Transport for London – Older People 119


Proportion of population<br />

<strong>in</strong> each age group<br />

0 ‒ 4<br />

5 ‒ 9<br />

10 ‒ 14<br />

15 ‒ 19<br />

20 ‒ 24<br />

25 ‒ 29<br />

30 ‒ 34<br />

35 ‒ 39<br />

40 ‒ 44<br />

45 ‒ 49<br />

50 ‒ 54<br />

55 ‒ 59<br />

60 ‒ 64<br />

65 ‒ 69<br />

70 ‒ 74<br />

75 ‒ 79<br />

80 ‒ 84<br />

85 ‒ 89<br />

90 ‒ 94<br />

95 ‒ 99<br />

100 and over<br />

Older People<br />

The chart below shows how, <strong>in</strong> comparison to the UK average, London has a<br />

smaller proportion of people aged 65 and over and a greater proportion of people<br />

aged between 20 and 44. Eighteen per cent of the total UK population are aged 65<br />

or over [2].<br />

Population split by age (2011) [2]<br />

12%<br />

10%<br />

8%<br />

6%<br />

4%<br />

2%<br />

0%<br />

United K<strong>in</strong>gdom<br />

London<br />

Londoners aged 65 and over are more likely to be women (56 per cent) than all<br />

Londoners (51 per cent). The difference is particularly pronounced among<br />

Londoners aged 80 and over where 63 per cent are women [2].<br />

Proportion of Londoners who are women by age (2011) [2]<br />

Transport for London – Older People 120


Older People<br />

In this document we use two primary s<strong>our</strong>ces of of demographic data: the Office<br />

for National Statistics Census and the London Travel Demand Survey. The<br />

follow<strong>in</strong>g table shows the demographic breakdown of Londoners recorded <strong>in</strong> the<br />

LTDS.<br />

LTDS demographic profile of older people <strong>in</strong> London (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All 65+ 65-69 70-79 80+<br />

Base (15,700) (2,475) (748) (1,113) (614)<br />

Gender<br />

Men 49 45 49 44 41<br />

Women 51 55 51 56 59<br />

Ethnicity<br />

White 62 81 80 78 88<br />

BAME 37 19 20 22 12<br />

Household <strong>in</strong>come<br />

Less than £10,000 17 34 23 34 48<br />

£10,000–£19,999 19 31 29 32 31<br />

£20,000–£34,999 20 17 22 17 12<br />

£35,000–£49,999 13 7 9 7 3<br />

£50,000–£74,999 15 6 7 6 3<br />

£75,000+ 16 6 9 5 3<br />

Work<strong>in</strong>g status*<br />

Work<strong>in</strong>g full-time 47 5 10 3 1<br />

Work<strong>in</strong>g part-time 11 6 11 6 1<br />

Student 10 - - - -<br />

Retired 15 86 76 87 97<br />

Not work<strong>in</strong>g 16 3 4 4 2<br />

Disabled<br />

Yes 11 37 20 34 64<br />

No 89 63 80 66 36<br />

Impairment affects <strong>travel</strong><br />

Yes 10 34 19 31 60<br />

No 90 66 81 69 40<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five and work<strong>in</strong>g status does not <strong>in</strong>clude under 16s.<br />

All TfL surveys use the Equality Act 2010 to def<strong>in</strong>e disabled people as those who def<strong>in</strong>e themselves as hav<strong>in</strong>g a long-term physical or mental<br />

disability or health issue that impacts on their daily activities, the work they can do, or limits their ability to <strong>travel</strong>.<br />

Transport for London – Older People 121


Older People<br />

White Londoners tend to have an older age profile than BAME Londoners. This is<br />

seen <strong>in</strong> Census data below, where 78 per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over are<br />

from a white ethnic group, compared with 60 per cent of all Londoners [2].<br />

Proportion of older Londoners by detailed ethnic group [2]<br />

% All 65+<br />

White: total 60 78<br />

English/Welsh/Scottish/Northern Irish/British 45 67<br />

Irish 2 5<br />

Gypsy or Irish Traveller - -<br />

Other white 13 6<br />

Mixed/multiple ethnic group: total 5 1<br />

White and black Caribbean 1 -<br />

White and black African 1 -<br />

White and Asian 1 -<br />

Other Mixed 1 -<br />

Asian/Asian British: total 18 11<br />

Indian 7 6<br />

Pakistani 3 1<br />

Bangladeshi 3 1<br />

Ch<strong>in</strong>ese 2 1<br />

Other Asian 5 2<br />

Black/African/Caribbean/black British: total 13 8<br />

African 7 2<br />

Caribbean 4 5<br />

Other black 2 1<br />

Other ethnic group: total 3 2<br />

Arab 1 -<br />

Any other ethnic group 2 1<br />

Employment and <strong>in</strong>come<br />

Eighty-six per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over are retired and 11 per cent are<br />

<strong>in</strong> full- or part-time work. The proportion of Londoners who are retired ranges<br />

from 76 per cent among Londoners aged 65-69 to 97 per cent among Londoners<br />

aged 80 or over [12].<br />

With <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g age the proportion of Londoners who are work<strong>in</strong>g decreases and<br />

therefore a shift occurs towards <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g proportions <strong>in</strong> the lower bands for<br />

household <strong>in</strong>come [12]. Please note that household <strong>in</strong>come does not always<br />

reflect employment or household wealth.<br />

Average household <strong>in</strong>comes are substantially lower for older Londoners than<br />

Londoners overall; 34 per cent of Londoners aged 65 or over have an annual<br />

household <strong>in</strong>come of less than £10,000, compared with 17 per cent of all<br />

Londoners [12].<br />

Transport for London – Older People 122


Older People<br />

Older disabled people<br />

Of all Londoners aged 65 and over, 37 per cent report that they are disabled or<br />

have a health issue that limits their daily activities. With <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g age, the<br />

proportion of people who report that they are disabled or have a health issue that<br />

limits their ability to <strong>travel</strong> and get about <strong>in</strong>creases to 64 per cent among<br />

Londoners aged 80 or over [12].<br />

You can f<strong>in</strong>d more <strong>in</strong>formation about disabled Londoners <strong>in</strong> the relevant chapter<br />

of this report.<br />

London boroughs<br />

The boroughs with the highest proportion of older residents are:<br />

London boroughs with the highest proportion of older residents [2]<br />

Borough<br />

% proportion of<br />

older residents<br />

Haver<strong>in</strong>g 18<br />

Bromley 17<br />

Bexley 16<br />

Sutton 14<br />

Harrow 14<br />

The boroughs with the lowest proportion of older residents are:<br />

London boroughs with the lowest proportion of older residents [2]<br />

Borough<br />

% proportion of<br />

older residents<br />

Tower Hamlets 6<br />

Newham 7<br />

Hackney 7<br />

Lambeth 8<br />

Southwark 8<br />

Transport for London – Older People 123


Older People<br />

Travel behavi<strong>our</strong><br />

Older Londoners aged 65 or over make an average of 2.3 trips per weekday,<br />

compared with 2.7 trips per weekday for all Londoners [12].<br />

Londoners aged between 65 and 69 make an average of 2.7 trips per weekday, <strong>in</strong><br />

l<strong>in</strong>e with the number of trips made by Londoners overall. This average drops to 2.4<br />

among Londoners aged between 70 and 79 and 1.6 among people aged 80 and<br />

over [12]. This is likely to be related to the lower proportion of older Londoners <strong>in</strong><br />

work, as retired Londoners do not need to make regular j<strong>our</strong>neys to work, as well<br />

as decreas<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>dividual mobility.<br />

Transport types used<br />

The most frequent method of transport used by older Londoners and all<br />

Londoners is walk<strong>in</strong>g. Eighty-six per cent of Londoners aged 65 or over walk at<br />

least once a week. This figure is higher for Londoners aged under 80; 94 per cent<br />

of Londoners aged 65-69 walk at least once a week. The equivalent figure is 90 per<br />

cent among Londoners aged 70-79, and 69 per cent among Londoners aged 80 or<br />

older [12].<br />

Buses are the next most common type of transport used by older Londoners; 61<br />

per cent of Londoners aged 65 or over use the bus at least once a week. Use of the<br />

bus is higher among Londoners aged between 65 and 79 (65 per cent of Londoners<br />

aged 65-79 use the bus at least once a week) but this decreases among Londoners<br />

aged 80 or over (50 per cent). For all other types of transport, except the car as a<br />

passenger and m<strong>in</strong>icab, levels of use either rema<strong>in</strong> the same or decl<strong>in</strong>e as age<br />

<strong>in</strong>creases [12].<br />

Among Londoners aged 65-69, 60 per cent drive a car at least once a week which<br />

is higher than Londoners overall (39 per cent). Londoners aged 80 or over are<br />

considerably less likely to drive a car, and only 27 per cent drive on a weekly basis<br />

[12].<br />

Transport for London – Older People 124


Older People<br />

Proportion of Londoners us<strong>in</strong>g types of transport at least once a week (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All 65+ 65-69 70-79 80+<br />

Base (15,700) (2,475) (748) (1,113) (614)<br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g 96 86 94 90 69<br />

Bus 61 61 65 65 50<br />

Car (as a passenger) 48 45 44 44 45<br />

Car (as a driver) 39 45 60 44 27<br />

Tube 39 23 33 23 11<br />

National Rail 17 11 13 13 6<br />

Overground 9 4 6 4 1<br />

Other taxi/m<strong>in</strong>icab (PHV) 6 5 4 6 6<br />

London taxi/black cab 5 3 3 3 3<br />

DLR 4 2 2 2 1<br />

Tram (London Traml<strong>in</strong>k) 2 1 1 2 1<br />

Motorbike 1 - 1 - -<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Older Londoners are less likely to walk at least once a week than all Londoners (86<br />

per cent of Londoners aged 65 or over walk once a week compared with 96 per<br />

cent of all Londoners). The proportion of older Londoners who walk decl<strong>in</strong>es with<br />

age; 94 per cent of 65 to 69 year olds walk at least once a week compared with 90<br />

per cent of 70 to 79 year olds and 69 per cent of Londoners aged 80 or over [12].<br />

Frequency of walk<strong>in</strong>g (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All 65+ 65-69 70-79 80+<br />

Base (15,700) (2,475) (748) (1,113) (614)<br />

5 or more days a week 83 61 72 64 41<br />

3 or 4 days a week 6 13 13 13 14<br />

2 days a week 4 7 6 7 8<br />

1 day a week 3 5 3 5 6<br />

At least once a fortnight 1 1 1 2 2<br />

At least once a month 1 2 1 1 3<br />

At least once a year 1 2 1 2 5<br />

Not used <strong>in</strong> last year 1 7 2 5 18<br />

Never used - 1 - 1 3<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Transport for London – Older People 125


Older People<br />

The proportion of Londoners aged 65 and over who walk at least once a week to<br />

complete small errands (84 per cent) is <strong>in</strong> l<strong>in</strong>e with the 86 per cent of all Londoners<br />

who do this. However, smaller proportions of people aged 65 and over walk for<br />

other purposes listed compared with all Londoners [19].<br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g at least once a week by purpose of j<strong>our</strong>ney (2015) [19]<br />

% who walk at least once a week All 65+<br />

Base (1,000) (314)<br />

Walk…<br />

To complete small errands such as gett<strong>in</strong>g a newspaper or<br />

86 84<br />

post<strong>in</strong>g a letter<br />

As part of a longer j<strong>our</strong>ney 77 70<br />

To visit friends and relatives 49 41<br />

To visit pubs/restaurants/c<strong>in</strong>emas and other social places 53 40<br />

To get to work/school/college 52 11<br />

To take a child to school 18 4<br />

Bus<br />

Bus use at least once a week among Londoners aged 65 and over is 61 per cent,<br />

which is the same level as for all Londoners. Use of the bus among older<br />

Londoners is higher among those aged between 65 and 79 (65 per cent use the bus<br />

at least once a week) and then decreases among Londoners aged 80 or over (50<br />

per cent) [12].<br />

Frequency of <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g by bus (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All 65+ 65-69 70-79 80+<br />

Base (15,700) (2,475) (748) (1,113) (614)<br />

5 or more days a week 28 20 21 22 18<br />

3 or 4 days a week 12 20 22 21 14<br />

2 days a week 11 12 13 13 10<br />

1 day a week 10 9 9 9 8<br />

At least once a fortnight 5 6 6 6 4<br />

At least once a month 10 8 9 8 7<br />

At least once a year 14 11 11 10 11<br />

Not used <strong>in</strong> last year 7 13 7 10 25<br />

Never used 2 2 1 1 3<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Transport for London – Older People 126


Older People<br />

People over 60 years old are significantly less likely to use the bus for work<br />

purposes, dur<strong>in</strong>g the day or night. They’re more likely to use the bus for shopp<strong>in</strong>g,<br />

personal bus<strong>in</strong>ess and visit<strong>in</strong>g friends/ relatives, both dur<strong>in</strong>g the day and at night<br />

[28].<br />

Purpose of bus j<strong>our</strong>ney by age and time of day (2014) [28]<br />

Dur<strong>in</strong>g the day<br />

At night<br />

% All 60+ All 60+<br />

Base (weighted) (37,585) (4,933) (9,121) (263)<br />

To/from or for work 53 20 53 39<br />

To/from<br />

school/education<br />

7 1 4 2<br />

To/from shopp<strong>in</strong>g 11 33 1 6<br />

Visit<strong>in</strong>g<br />

friends/relatives<br />

9 12 13 18<br />

Leisure 9 16 21 19<br />

Personal bus<strong>in</strong>ess 7 13 2 7<br />

Other purpose 3 6 6 9<br />

Car<br />

Forty-five per cent of Londoners aged 65 or over drive a car at least once a week<br />

and 45 per cent <strong>travel</strong> as a passenger <strong>in</strong> a car [12].<br />

Fifty-eight per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over hold a full car driv<strong>in</strong>g licence,<br />

which is slightly lower than the figure for Londoners overall (64 per cent all<br />

Londoners aged 17 or over). The proportion of older Londoners who hold a full car<br />

driv<strong>in</strong>g licence reduces with age: 74 per cent of 65 to 69 year olds hold a full driv<strong>in</strong>g<br />

licence compared to 58 per cent of those aged 70-79, and 38 per cent of people<br />

aged over 80 [12].<br />

Proportion of Londoners with a full car driv<strong>in</strong>g licence (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All (17+) 65+ 65-69 70-79 80+<br />

Base (13,127) (2,475) (748) (1,113) (614)<br />

Holds a full car driv<strong>in</strong>g licence 64 58 74 58 38<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Household access to a car reduces with age; 61 per cent of Londoners aged 65 and<br />

over have a car <strong>in</strong> their household compared with 65 per cent across all Londoners.<br />

Among Londoners aged 65-69, access to a car <strong>in</strong> the household is higher at 73 per<br />

cent and this drops to 63 per cent among Londoners aged 70-79, and 43 per cent<br />

for Londoners aged 80 and over [12].<br />

Transport for London – Older People 127


Older People<br />

Proportion of Londoners <strong>in</strong> a household with access to a car (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All 65+ 65-69 70-79 80+<br />

Base (15,700) (2,475) (748) (1,113) (614)<br />

0 cars 35 39 27 37 57<br />

1 car 45 46 48 49 37<br />

2+ cars 20 16 25 14 7<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

After the age of 80, older people tend to drive less frequently. Driv<strong>in</strong>g can provide<br />

a sense of self-worth through <strong>in</strong>dependence and equality with other Londoners,<br />

freedom through greater accessibility and convenience, and enjoyment of the act<br />

itself. Therefore giv<strong>in</strong>g up driv<strong>in</strong>g is an important and emotional event [50].<br />

‘When I rel<strong>in</strong>quish my car it will be like my snail shell on my back is be<strong>in</strong>g taken<br />

away.’ (Driver aged 65+) [50]<br />

Among Londoners aged 60 and over who do not drive 5 , the most common reasons<br />

for not do<strong>in</strong>g so are a lack of <strong>in</strong>terest (43 per cent), availability of friends and family<br />

to drive them <strong>in</strong>stead (38 per cent), a focus on feel<strong>in</strong>g too old (27 per cent) and<br />

be<strong>in</strong>g concerned about safety (22 per cent) [51].<br />

Reasons for not driv<strong>in</strong>g by age (England) (2013) [51]<br />

% All 17+ 60+<br />

Base (2,965) (990)<br />

Not <strong>in</strong>terested <strong>in</strong> driv<strong>in</strong>g 29 43<br />

Family/friends drive me when necessary 32 38<br />

Too old 9 27<br />

Safety concerns/nervous about driv<strong>in</strong>g 17 22<br />

Other forms of transport available 20 14<br />

Physical difficulties/health impairments 11 12<br />

Cost of learn<strong>in</strong>g to drive 32 10<br />

Cost of buy<strong>in</strong>g a car 25 10<br />

Cost of <strong>in</strong>surance 25 8<br />

Busy/congested roads 6 7<br />

Other general motor<strong>in</strong>g costs 12 5<br />

Put off by theory/practical test 4 2<br />

Too busy to learn 10 2<br />

Environmental reasons 3 1<br />

Other 5 3<br />

Based on <strong>in</strong>dividuals aged 17 and over who do not hold a full driv<strong>in</strong>g licence and are not currently learn<strong>in</strong>g to drive.<br />

5 Note that these data are for Great Brita<strong>in</strong> and not London specifically.<br />

Transport for London – Older People 128


Older People<br />

Tube<br />

Twenty-three per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over use the Tube at least once a<br />

week. This is considerably lower than Londoners overall (39 per cent). The<br />

proportion us<strong>in</strong>g the Tube at least once a week decreases further with age, from<br />

33 per cent of Londoners aged 65-69, to 25 per cent among 70 to 79 year olds and<br />

11 per cent for those aged 80 and over [12].<br />

Frequency of <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g by Tube (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All 65+ 65-69 70-79 80+<br />

Base (15,700) (2,475) (748) (1,113) (614)<br />

5 or more days a week 15 3 5 3 1<br />

3 or 4 days a week 7 6 6 7 4<br />

2 days a week 8 6 10 6 2<br />

1 day a week 9 7 12 9 4<br />

At least once a fortnight 8 4 9 8 4<br />

At least once a month 15 12 14 12 7<br />

At least once a year 25 24 26 25 21<br />

Not used <strong>in</strong> last year 11 28 16 26 49<br />

Never used 3 5 2 5 8<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Cycl<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Eight per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over sometimes use a bike to get around<br />

London [17]. Note that we do not currently have data to analyse this age group<br />

further.<br />

Proportion of Londoners who cycle (November 2014) [17]<br />

% All 65+<br />

Base (2,192) (323)<br />

Cyclist (sometimes uses a bike to get<br />

around London)<br />

Non-cyclist (never uses a bike to get<br />

around London)<br />

17 8<br />

83 92<br />

The proportion of Londoners aged 65 and over who can ride a bike (72 per cent) is<br />

lower than the total population of Londoners (83 per cent) [17].<br />

Proportion of Londoners able to ride a bike (November 2014) [17]<br />

% All 65+<br />

Base (2,192) (323)<br />

Can ride a bike 83 72<br />

Cannot ride a bike 15 25<br />

Transport for London – Older People 129


Older People<br />

We have developed a behavi<strong>our</strong>al change model to look at Londoners’ read<strong>in</strong>ess<br />

to cycle or cycle more. Sixty-n<strong>in</strong>e per cent of Londoners classified themselves as<br />

be<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the ‘pre-contemplation’ category (def<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>in</strong> the behavi<strong>our</strong> model table<br />

below). Londoners aged 65 and over show a lower level of ‘contemplation’ than<br />

other Londoners, and 87 per cent are <strong>in</strong> the pre-contemplation category [17].<br />

A small proportion of Londoners aged 65 and over classify themselves as be<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong><br />

the ‘susta<strong>in</strong>ed change’ category, mean<strong>in</strong>g that they started cycl<strong>in</strong>g a while ago<br />

and are still do<strong>in</strong>g it occasionally or regularly [17].<br />

Behavi<strong>our</strong> change model cycl<strong>in</strong>g (November 2014) [17]<br />

% All 65+<br />

Base (all) (2,192) (323)<br />

Pre-contemplation:<br />

‘You have never thought about it, but would be unlikely to start <strong>in</strong> the future’<br />

‘You have thought about it, but don’t <strong>in</strong>tend start<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the future’<br />

‘You have never thought about it, but could be open to it <strong>in</strong> the future’<br />

Contemplation:<br />

‘You are th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g about start<strong>in</strong>g soon’<br />

Preparation:<br />

‘You have decided to start soon’<br />

Change:<br />

‘You have tried to start recently, but am f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g it difficult’<br />

‘You have started recently and am f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g it quite easy so far’<br />

Susta<strong>in</strong>ed change:<br />

‘You started a while ago and am still do<strong>in</strong>g it occasionally’<br />

‘You started a while ago and am still do<strong>in</strong>g it regularly’<br />

Lapsed:<br />

‘You started do<strong>in</strong>g this but couldn’t stick to it’<br />

69 87<br />

10 2<br />

3 -<br />

2 -<br />

10 6<br />

6 4<br />

Transport for London – Older People 130


Older People<br />

Cycl<strong>in</strong>g schemes<br />

Awareness of Cycle Hire among Londoners aged 65 and over is 95 per cent. This is<br />

similar to awareness among all Londoners which stands at 91 per cent. Despite<br />

high awareness, only one per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over have actually<br />

used the scheme compared to 17 per cent of all Londoners [17].<br />

Two per cent of Londoners aged 65 or over <strong>in</strong>tend to use Cycle Hire <strong>in</strong> the future<br />

(compared with 27 per cent of all Londoners who haven’t yet hired a bicycle) [17].<br />

Evidence suggests older Londoners are less likely to check for availability of<br />

bicycles and/or spaces before hir<strong>in</strong>g a bicycle (25 per cent of people aged over 55<br />

always or usually check for bicycle availability, compared with 39 per cent of<br />

people aged 16-34) [52]. This is most probably related to lower use of technology<br />

among older Londoners [15].<br />

Expected use of Cycle Hire <strong>in</strong> the future (November 2014) [17]<br />

% All 65+<br />

Base (1,180) (165)<br />

Yes def<strong>in</strong>itely/probably 27 2<br />

Yes, def<strong>in</strong>itely 9 0<br />

Yes, probably 18 2<br />

No, probably not 30 30<br />

No, def<strong>in</strong>itely not 33 61<br />

Not sure 10 6<br />

Seventy per cent of older Londoners are aware of Cycle Superhighways, which is<br />

higher than the figure for all Londoners (61 per cent). Seven per cent of older<br />

Londoners say that they are likely to use Cycle Superhighways <strong>in</strong> the future [17].<br />

Expected use of Cycle Superhighways (November 2014) [17]<br />

% All 65+<br />

Base (1,180) (165)<br />

Yes def<strong>in</strong>itely/ probably 23 7<br />

Yes, def<strong>in</strong>itely 6 1<br />

Yes, probably 17 6<br />

No, probably not 28 29<br />

No, def<strong>in</strong>itely not 31 55<br />

Not sure 17 9<br />

Transport for London – Older People 131


Older People<br />

Dial-a-Ride<br />

Dial-a-Ride members tend to have an older age profile than disabled Londoners<br />

overall. Eighty-three per cent of Dial-a-Ride members are aged 65 and over,<br />

compared with 41 per cent of all disabled Londoners. Twenty-seven per cent of<br />

Dial-a-Ride members are aged between 75-84 and 43 per cent are 85 and over,<br />

compared with 16 per cent and eight per cent respectively for all disabled<br />

Londoners [30, AB].<br />

Dial-a-Ride members are more likely to be women (74 per cent) [30].<br />

Dial-a-Ride (DaR) membership by age (2012 based on 2010 data) [2, 30]<br />

% All disabled Londoners<br />

Census<br />

DaR members<br />

(41,451)<br />

Under 25 9 1<br />

25-34 7 2<br />

35-49 19 5<br />

50-64 25 11<br />

65-74 17 13<br />

75-84 16 28<br />

85+ 8 40<br />

Where the proportion of Dial-a-Ride members does not sum to 100 per cent, this is due to no age be<strong>in</strong>g listed for the member on<br />

file.<br />

J<strong>our</strong>ney purpose<br />

The proportion of weekday j<strong>our</strong>neys made for different purposes varies by age.<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

Twenty-eight per cent of j<strong>our</strong>neys are work-related for all Londoners<br />

(<strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g to/from usual workplace, or ‘other work-related’ <strong>travel</strong>) whereas<br />

only seven per cent of older Londoners’ weekday j<strong>our</strong>neys are for this purpose<br />

Fifty-two per cent of older Londoners’ j<strong>our</strong>neys are for shopp<strong>in</strong>g and personal<br />

bus<strong>in</strong>ess (compared with 24 per cent for all Londoners)<br />

Leisure j<strong>our</strong>neys make up 31 per cent of weekday trips for older Londoners<br />

(compared with 23 per cent for all Londoners) [12]<br />

Weekday j<strong>our</strong>ney purpose (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All 65+ 65-69 70-79 80+<br />

Base – all trips by Londoners<br />

Shopp<strong>in</strong>g/personal bus<strong>in</strong>ess 24 52 46 53 64<br />

Usual workplace 20 4 6 3 -<br />

Leisure 23 31 33 32 24<br />

Education 19 2 2 2 1<br />

Other work-related 8 3 3 3 2<br />

Other 6 8 9 7 9<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Transport for London – Older People 132


Older People<br />

Ticket types<br />

Freedom Passes are by far the most common ticket type used by Londoners aged<br />

65 or over; 97 per cent of public transport users use a Freedom Pass [32].<br />

S<strong>in</strong>ce very high proportions of Londoners <strong>in</strong> this age group make use of the<br />

Freedom Pass, only a small percentage of people aged 65 or over use other tickets<br />

such as Oyster PAYG (only five per cent use Oyster PAYG on any form of public<br />

transport) [32].<br />

Tickets and passes used on public transport (January 2015) [32]<br />

%<br />

Base: Public transport users:<br />

All<br />

(975)<br />

65+<br />

(152)<br />

Freedom Pass 21 97<br />

Oyster PAYG 58 5<br />

Oyster Season ticket 20 1<br />

Contactless payment 16 1<br />

Cash/s<strong>in</strong>gle/return 10 3<br />

Any other Travelcard 7 1<br />

Transport for London – Older People 133


Older People<br />

Travelcards<br />

Very few older Londoners have an Oyster card compared with the proportion of all<br />

Londoners (six per cent of Londoners aged 65 or over compared with 60 per cent<br />

all Londoners). Londoners aged 65-69 are more likely to have an Oyster card than<br />

people aged over 80 (n<strong>in</strong>e per cent for 65 to 69 year olds compared with three per<br />

cent of Londoners aged 80 or over) [12].<br />

N<strong>in</strong>ety-two per cent of 65 year olds or over have an older person’s Freedom Pass.<br />

This drops to 87 per cent for those aged 80 or over [12].<br />

Possession of an Oyster card or Freedom Pass (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All 65+ 65-69 70-79 80+<br />

Base (15,700) (2,475) (748) (1,113) (614)<br />

Have an Oyster card 60 6 9 5 3<br />

Older person’s Freedom Pass 15 92 95 93 87<br />

Disabled person’s Freedom<br />

Pass<br />

2 - - 1 -<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Note that Oyster card ownership excludes Freedom Passes, Oyster photocards and Zip cards.<br />

Transport for London – Older People 134


Older People<br />

Barriers<br />

We have conducted several research programmes to <strong>in</strong>vestigate the barriers faced<br />

by Londoners when us<strong>in</strong>g public transport. Our f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs from each of these studies<br />

are <strong>in</strong> general agreement. However, it is worth not<strong>in</strong>g that the issue of barriers is<br />

complex and the specific questions that we ask Londoners may have an impact<br />

upon the responses that they provide. The impact of specific barriers may also be<br />

much more significant for some Londoners than others.<br />

With <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g age, some older people become less active. Reduced activity<br />

levels are often connected to chang<strong>in</strong>g lifestyles, expectations and confidence<br />

levels. Accessible transport can help people to ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong> a more active lifestyle<br />

[53].<br />

Qualitative research based on <strong>in</strong>-depth <strong>in</strong>terviews (which <strong>in</strong>cluded accompanied<br />

j<strong>our</strong>neys 6 ) that we completed <strong>in</strong> 2009 showed that there are three categories of<br />

barriers to transport use that older people face <strong>in</strong> particular. These are:<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

Physical barriers – examples <strong>in</strong>clude long distances to bus stops and<br />

connection po<strong>in</strong>ts, presence of steps, speed of clos<strong>in</strong>g doors on public<br />

transport, and jerky movement on buses<br />

Emotional barriers – examples <strong>in</strong>clude overcrowd<strong>in</strong>g, loud or disruptive<br />

passengers, adverse weather conditions and the fear of crime<br />

Information barriers – many people restrict their j<strong>our</strong>neys to those that they<br />

know well, have reduced expectations that public transport can cater for their<br />

needs, and are unaware of supported <strong>travel</strong> options such as DaR [53]<br />

6 ‘Accompanied j<strong>our</strong>neys’ refers to j<strong>our</strong>neys made when <strong>in</strong>terviewers <strong>travel</strong> with respondents to observe and<br />

ask questions about their j<strong>our</strong>ney experience.<br />

Transport for London – Older People 135


Older People<br />

Barriers to greater public transport use<br />

When presented with a number of possible barriers to us<strong>in</strong>g public transport more<br />

often, the greatest barrier, cited by 40 per cent of Londoners aged 65 years and<br />

over (compared of 59 per cent of all Londoners) is concern about overcrowded<br />

services. A larger proportion of Londoners aged 65 and over also said that none of<br />

the barriers listed put them off us<strong>in</strong>g public transport (33 per cent of 65 year olds<br />

and over compared with 17 per cent of all Londoners) [14].<br />

Beyond overcrowd<strong>in</strong>g, the next most common barrier identified is about antisocial<br />

behavi<strong>our</strong>, which is mentioned by 34 per cent of both Londoners and Londoners<br />

aged 65 and over [14]. We address safety and security issues <strong>in</strong> more detail later <strong>in</strong><br />

this section.<br />

Cost of tickets is mentioned by n<strong>in</strong>e per cent of older Londoners as a barrier to<br />

greater public transport use; this <strong>in</strong>creases to 45 per cent of all Londoners [14].<br />

This is likely to reflect the high use of older people’s Freedom Passes amongst<br />

Londoners aged 65 and over.<br />

Barriers to us<strong>in</strong>g public transport more often (prompted) (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]<br />

% All 65+<br />

Base (4,005) (1,351)<br />

Overcrowded services 59 40<br />

Cost of tickets 45 9<br />

Slow j<strong>our</strong>ney times 41 18<br />

Unreliable services 37 19<br />

Concern about antisocial behavi<strong>our</strong> 34 34<br />

Dirty environment on the bus/tra<strong>in</strong> 28 20<br />

Fear of crime gett<strong>in</strong>g to/ wait<strong>in</strong>g for the<br />

24 20<br />

bus/tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Fear of crime on the bus/tra<strong>in</strong> 23 20<br />

Fear about knife crime 20 20<br />

Dirty environment gett<strong>in</strong>g to the bus/tra<strong>in</strong> 18 14<br />

Fear of terrorist attacks 12 11<br />

Graffiti 10 13<br />

Lack of <strong>in</strong>formation on how to use public<br />

10 10<br />

transport<br />

Risk of accidents 9 8<br />

Don’t understand how to buy bus tickets 5 4<br />

None of these 17 33<br />

Transport for London – Older People 136


Older People<br />

Safety and security<br />

We use a typology of worry to monitor the perceptions of Londoners with regard<br />

to their personal security while us<strong>in</strong>g public transport <strong>in</strong> London. The TfL typology<br />

classifies people <strong>in</strong>to:<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

Unworried – reports no general worry and no episodes of recent worry<br />

Unexpressed fear – reports no general worry, but specific recent episodes<br />

Anxious – reports general worry, but no specific recent episodes<br />

Worried – reports general worry, and specific recent episodes<br />

Don’t know<br />

The majority of Londoners fall <strong>in</strong>to the ‘unworried’ category, which means that<br />

they are generally unworried about their personal security <strong>in</strong> London, and have<br />

experienced no <strong>in</strong>cidents that made them feel worried <strong>in</strong> the last three months. A<br />

greater proportion of older Londoners (65 and over) are ‘unworried’ than the<br />

average across all Londoners (83 per cent of 65 year olds and over compared with<br />

75 per cent of all Londoners) [14].<br />

Typology of worry (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]<br />

% All 65+<br />

Base (4,005) (1,351)<br />

Unworried 75 83<br />

Unexpressed 11 6<br />

Anxious 6 6<br />

Worried 6 3<br />

Don’t know 2 3<br />

A similar pattern is observed when look<strong>in</strong>g at the levels of concern about personal<br />

security when us<strong>in</strong>g public transport <strong>in</strong> London. Aga<strong>in</strong>, Londoners aged 65 or over<br />

are more likely to say they are ‘not at all worried’ than all Londoners (54 per cent<br />

of older Londoners compared with 42 per cent all Londoners) [14].<br />

Levels of concern about personal security when us<strong>in</strong>g public transport <strong>in</strong> London (2013)<br />

[14]<br />

% All 65+<br />

Base (4,005) (1,351)<br />

Not at all worried 42 54<br />

A little bit worried 45 35<br />

Quite a bit worried 9 6<br />

Very worried 3 3<br />

Don’t know 1 2<br />

Transport for London – Older People 137


Older People<br />

Among older Londoners who are worried about their personal security when us<strong>in</strong>g<br />

public transport, 31 per cent of 65 year olds or over feel that this impacts<br />

negatively on their quality of life either ‘very much’ or ‘quite a bit’ (compared with<br />

32 per cent all Londoners) [14].<br />

Extent to which worry about personal security when us<strong>in</strong>g public transport reduces quality<br />

of life (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]<br />

% All 65+<br />

Base (all worried about personal safety) (463) (123)<br />

Not at all 19 21<br />

A little 29 21<br />

Moderately 19 21<br />

Quite a bit 19 19<br />

Don’t know 1 6<br />

Net: Quite a bit/very much 32 31<br />

A smaller proportion of older Londoners take precautions aga<strong>in</strong>st crime when<br />

us<strong>in</strong>g public transport (32 per cent of 65 year olds or over compared with 38 per<br />

cent of all Londoners). The most common precaution for older Londoners is to<br />

look after their belong<strong>in</strong>gs (37 per cent compared with 29 per cent for all<br />

Londoners) whereas the most common precaution for all Londoners is to sit near<br />

other people (34 per cent for all Londoners compared with 24 per cent for 65 year<br />

olds and over).<br />

Older Londoners are less likely than all Londoners to say that they <strong>travel</strong> with<br />

someone else, use a different route, <strong>travel</strong> at a different time of day, or avoid us<strong>in</strong>g<br />

a type of transport, but are more likely to say that they only take necessities with<br />

them (seven per cent of 65 year olds and over compared with three per cent all<br />

Londoners) [14].<br />

Precautions taken (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]<br />

% All 65+<br />

Base (all who take precautions) (1,507) (442)<br />

Look after my belong<strong>in</strong>gs 29 37<br />

Sit near to other people 34 24<br />

Travel with someone else 23 16<br />

Travel at a different time of day 16 11<br />

Use a different route 15 8<br />

Stay aware/vigilant 15 18<br />

Avoid us<strong>in</strong>g that type of transport 12 6<br />

Only take necessities with me 3 7<br />

Carry a personal alarm 3 6<br />

Note that responses 2% or below among all Londoners are not shown.<br />

Transport for London – Older People 138


Older People<br />

In terms of actual experiences, the proportion of older Londoners who have felt<br />

worried about their personal security when us<strong>in</strong>g public transport <strong>in</strong> the past three<br />

months is considerably lower than the average across all Londoners (eight per<br />

cent of 65 year olds or over compared with 17 per cent of all Londoners) [14].<br />

Older Londoners who have experienced a worry<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>cident <strong>in</strong> the three months<br />

prior to be<strong>in</strong>g surveyed were much more likely to have experienced this dur<strong>in</strong>g the<br />

day than at night (67 per cent of the most recent episodes of worry were<br />

experienced <strong>in</strong> the daytime compared with 40 per cent among all Londoners who<br />

have experienced a worry<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>cident) [14].<br />

Those who have felt worried about their personal security when us<strong>in</strong>g public<br />

transport <strong>in</strong> the last three months were asked on which type of transport they<br />

experienced this event. The types of transport where older Londoners experience<br />

worry<strong>in</strong>g events are similar to those reported by all Londoners (47 per cent of the<br />

most recent worry<strong>in</strong>g experiences by 65 year olds and over were on the bus, 27 per<br />

cent Tube, and 20 per cent tra<strong>in</strong>) [14].<br />

Crime and antisocial behavi<strong>our</strong> concerns affect the frequency of <strong>travel</strong> on the<br />

Tube, bus or National Rail ‘a little’ or ‘a lot’ for just over half of all Londoners (53<br />

per cent). The frequency of public transport use is affected ‘a little’ or ‘a lot’ for a<br />

smaller proportion of older Londoners (39 per cent of 65 year olds and over) [14].<br />

Proportion of Londoners for whom concerns over crime/antisocial behavi<strong>our</strong> affect the<br />

frequency of their public transport use ‘a lot/a little’ (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]<br />

% All 65+<br />

Base (4,005) (1,351)<br />

Overall: dur<strong>in</strong>g the day/after dark<br />

Underground/buses/National Rail 53 39<br />

Dur<strong>in</strong>g the day:<br />

Underground/buses/National Rail 23 17<br />

Underground 16 11<br />

Buses 17 11<br />

National Rail 11 8<br />

After dark:<br />

Underground/buses/National Rail 48 32<br />

Underground 37 25<br />

Buses 42 26<br />

National Rail 29 20<br />

Transport for London – Older People 139


Older People<br />

Customer satisfaction<br />

Overall satisfaction<br />

We measure overall satisfaction with various types of transport <strong>in</strong> London on an<br />

11-po<strong>in</strong>t scale, with 10 represent<strong>in</strong>g extremely satisfied and zero represent<strong>in</strong>g<br />

extremely dissatisfied. We then scale this up to 100). For all of the transport types<br />

listed below, Londoners aged 65 and over give higher overall satisfaction mean<br />

scores than all Londoners.<br />

We have standardised satisfaction rat<strong>in</strong>gs, which are shown <strong>in</strong> the table below.<br />

This allows TfL to apply consistent analysis across a wide range of satisfaction<br />

research.<br />

Average rat<strong>in</strong>g Level of satisfaction<br />

Under 50<br />

Very low/weak/poor<br />

50-54 Low/weak/poor<br />

55-64 Fairly/relatively/quite low/weak/poor<br />

65-69 Fair/reasonable<br />

70-79 Fairly/relatively/quite good<br />

80-84 Good or fairly high<br />

85-90 Very good or high<br />

90+ Excellent or very high<br />

Older people aged 65 and over are more satisfied with every mode of London transport compared<br />

with all Londoners. Their rat<strong>in</strong>gs are excellent or very high for most modes when compared with all<br />

customers, whose rat<strong>in</strong>gs out of 100 are generally three to six po<strong>in</strong>ts lower. The differences <strong>in</strong><br />

satisfaction rat<strong>in</strong>gs are most marked for bus, Tube and London Overground.<br />

Transport for London – Older People 140


Older People<br />

Overall satisfaction with transport types – all customers (2014/15) [16]<br />

Satisfaction score (0-100) All 65+<br />

Bus services<br />

Base (14,155) (2,586)<br />

Satisfaction score 85 90<br />

Bus stations<br />

Base (3,626) (346)<br />

Satisfaction score 78 81<br />

Underground<br />

Base (17,634) (1,243)<br />

Satisfaction score 84 89<br />

DLR<br />

Base (13,398) (339)<br />

Satisfaction score 89 93<br />

Overground<br />

Base (5,397) (118)<br />

Satisfaction score 83 90<br />

Dial-a-Ride<br />

Base (2,572) (2,211)<br />

Satisfaction score 92 93<br />

Tram<br />

Base (4,329) (905)<br />

Satisfaction score 89 93<br />

Victoria Coach Station<br />

Base (1,204) (110)<br />

Satisfaction score 82 85<br />

London River Services<br />

Base (2,106) (190)<br />

Satisfaction score 90 93<br />

Taxis<br />

Base (569) (50)<br />

Satisfaction score 83 88<br />

Woolwich Ferry<br />

Base (1,056) (78)<br />

Satisfaction score 79 85<br />

Satisfaction is not shown for Private Hire Vehicles and Night buses due to small base sizes.<br />

Transport for London – Older People 141


Score out of 100<br />

Older People<br />

Bus<br />

Overall satisfaction among bus users aged 65 and over is rated very good or high<br />

at 90 out of 100 (compared to 85 out of 100 for customers overall) [16].<br />

Overall satisfaction with buses over time is consistently high among customers<br />

aged 65 and over, and satisfaction levels are higher than those given by customers<br />

overall [16].<br />

Overall satisfaction with buses over time [16]<br />

100<br />

90<br />

80<br />

70<br />

86<br />

82 83 85 84 84 85<br />

87 85 87 88 89 90<br />

76 77 78 78 77<br />

79 80 79 80 80 82 83<br />

85<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

All customers Customers aged 65+<br />

Transport for London – Older People 142


Score out of 100<br />

Older People<br />

Satisfaction with value for money of bus services is also high among older<br />

customers, with a score of 87 out of 100 compared with 72 out of 100 from all<br />

customers [16]. It is worth not<strong>in</strong>g that older Londoners are generally entitled to<br />

free <strong>travel</strong> on the bus and as such the base size for satisfaction with value for<br />

money scores is lower than for overall satisfaction.<br />

Satisfaction with value for money with bus over time [16]<br />

100<br />

90<br />

80<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

84<br />

87<br />

78 77<br />

84 86 87<br />

80<br />

82<br />

73<br />

72 72 71<br />

74 74 73<br />

85<br />

69<br />

75<br />

90<br />

66 68<br />

85 87<br />

71 72<br />

All customers<br />

There are some differences with other elements concern<strong>in</strong>g buses. Customers aged 65 and over are<br />

more satisfied with safety and security at the stop (a score of 90 out of 100 for 65 year olds and over<br />

compared with 86 out of 100 for all customers) and time waited and j<strong>our</strong>ney time (89 out of 100 for<br />

those aged 65 and over compared with 85 out of 100 for all customers) [16].<br />

Transport for London – Older People 143


Score out of 100<br />

Older People<br />

Drivers of satisfaction<br />

Overall satisfaction with bus services amongst customers aged 65 and over is<br />

<strong>in</strong>fluenced by the ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>neys and the reliability of the bus. Driver<br />

behavi<strong>our</strong> and attitude is also one of the top five factors that affect satisfaction for<br />

older customers [16].<br />

Drivers of satisfaction for bus users [16]<br />

All customers 65+<br />

J<strong>our</strong>ney time<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Comfort <strong>in</strong>side the bus<br />

Satisfaction with <strong>in</strong>fo on delays at stop<br />

Time waited to catch bus<br />

Reliability of bus<br />

J<strong>our</strong>ney time<br />

Time waited to catch bus<br />

Driver's behavi<strong>our</strong> and attitude<br />

Tube<br />

Customers aged 65 and over who use the Tube rate it as very good or high for<br />

overall satisfaction (89 out of 100), a result which is higher than for customers<br />

overall (84 out of 100) [16].<br />

Overall satisfaction scores for the last 10 years show that people aged 65 and over<br />

are consistently more satisfied with the Tube than customers overall [16].<br />

Overall satisfaction with the Tube over time [16]<br />

100<br />

90<br />

84<br />

87<br />

89<br />

87 85<br />

83<br />

87 87 86 85<br />

90<br />

87<br />

89<br />

80<br />

70<br />

60<br />

75 76 78 78 76 77<br />

79 79 79 80<br />

83 83 84<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

All customers Customers aged 65+<br />

Transport for London – Older People 144


Score out of 100<br />

Older People<br />

As with overall satisfaction, satisfaction with value for money is consistently<br />

higher among customers aged 65 and over than customers overall (<strong>in</strong> the latest<br />

year this was 91 out of 100 among 65 year olds and over compared with 69 out of<br />

100 for all customers) [16].<br />

Satisfaction with value for money with the Tube over time [16]<br />

100<br />

90<br />

80<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

88 89 89 87 88 87<br />

90 89 89 90 91 90 91<br />

63 64 62 62 61 63 65 67 65 66 67 69<br />

62<br />

All customers Customers aged 65+<br />

Drivers of satisfaction<br />

Our analysis of the factors that drive satisfaction among Tube users shows that for<br />

customers aged 65 and over comfort of j<strong>our</strong>neys, ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>neys and<br />

length of j<strong>our</strong>ney are all important. These factors are very similar to the drivers for<br />

all Londoners. The table below shows the top drivers of satisfaction for customers<br />

overall and customers aged 65 and over [16].<br />

Drivers of satisfaction for Tube users [16]<br />

All customers 65+<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Length of j<strong>our</strong>ney time<br />

Comfort of j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Length of time waited for tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Personal safety on tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Comfort of j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Length of j<strong>our</strong>ney time<br />

Tra<strong>in</strong> crowd<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Smoothness of j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Transport for London – Older People 145


Older People<br />

Overground<br />

As with other types of transport, customers aged 65 and over rate the Overground<br />

as very good/high on average (90 out of 100). This is higher than the proportion of<br />

customers overall (83 out of 100) [16].<br />

Overall satisfaction with London Overground over time – all customers [16]<br />

Satisfaction score All 65+<br />

(0-100)<br />

Base 2014/15 (5,397) (118)<br />

2009/10 73 82<br />

2010/11 80 86<br />

2011/12 82 85<br />

2012/13 82 90<br />

2013/14 82 89<br />

2014/15 83 90<br />

Older customers are more satisfied with value for money on the Overground than<br />

customers overall (92 out of 100 among customers aged 65 or over compared with<br />

73 out of 100 all customers) [16].<br />

Satisfaction with value for money with London Overground over time – all customers [16]<br />

Satisfaction score All 65+<br />

(0-100)<br />

Base 2014/15 (5,182) (111)<br />

2011/12 72 88<br />

2012/13 71 90<br />

2013/14 70 93<br />

2014/15 73 92<br />

Drivers of satisfaction<br />

Analysis of what leads to satisfaction among Overground users shows that for<br />

customers aged 65 and over, condition and state of repair, cleanl<strong>in</strong>ess and<br />

freedom from graffiti, and <strong>in</strong>formation about service disruptions are important<br />

factors. Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g the j<strong>our</strong>ney, condition and state of repair and feel<strong>in</strong>g<br />

valued are the ma<strong>in</strong> factors among all Londoners [16].<br />

Drivers of satisfaction for Overground users [16]<br />

All customers 65+<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g y<strong>our</strong> j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Condition and state of repair<br />

Feel valued as a customer<br />

Comfort of the tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Information about service disruptions on the<br />

tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Condition and state of repair<br />

Cleanl<strong>in</strong>ess and freedom from graffiti<br />

Information about service disruptions given at<br />

the station<br />

The number of tra<strong>in</strong>s an h<strong>our</strong> on this route<br />

Personal safety on the station<br />

Transport for London – Older People 146


Older People<br />

Docklands Light Railway (DLR)<br />

Overall satisfaction with the DLR is rated very high among customers aged 65 and<br />

over and is higher than with customers overall (93 out of 100 among customers<br />

aged 65 and over compared with 89 out of 100 for all customers) [16].<br />

Overall satisfaction with DLR over time – all customers [16]<br />

Satisfaction score All 65+<br />

(0-100)<br />

Base 2014/15 (13,398) (339)<br />

2009/10 81 88<br />

2010/11 81 90<br />

2011/12 82 89<br />

2012/13 87 92<br />

2013/14 87 93<br />

2014/15 89 93<br />

Older customers are more satisfied with value for money on the DLR than<br />

customers overall (91 out of 100 among customers aged 65 and over compared<br />

with 77 out of 100 all customers) [16].<br />

Satisfaction with value for money with DLR over time – all customers [16]<br />

Satisfaction score All 65+<br />

(0-100)<br />

Base 2014/15 (12,839) (316)<br />

2011/12 72 89<br />

2012/13 74 91<br />

2013/14 75 93<br />

2014/15 77 91<br />

Drivers of satisfaction<br />

Comfort <strong>in</strong>side the tra<strong>in</strong>, ease of gett<strong>in</strong>g on the tra<strong>in</strong> and length of wait<strong>in</strong>g time<br />

are key drivers of overall satisfaction amongst DLR users aged 65 and over [16].<br />

Drivers of satisfaction for DLR users [16]<br />

All customers 65+<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g y<strong>our</strong> j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Comfort <strong>in</strong>side the tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Comfort of the tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Length of j<strong>our</strong>ney time<br />

Reliability of tra<strong>in</strong>s<br />

Feel valued as a customer<br />

Ease of gett<strong>in</strong>g on the tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Length of time waited for the tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Reliability of tra<strong>in</strong>s<br />

Freedom from graffiti <strong>in</strong>side the tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Transport for London – Older People 147


Older People<br />

Dial-a-Ride<br />

Older customers who use the Dial-a-Ride service rate it as excellent, giv<strong>in</strong>g the<br />

service an overall satisfaction score of 93 out of 100 [16].<br />

Overall satisfaction with Dial-a-Ride over time – all customers [16]<br />

Satisfaction score 65+ 65-69 70-79 80-89 90+<br />

(0-100)<br />

Base 2014/15 (2,211) (134) (606) (1,080) (391)<br />

2009/10 92 90 91 92 93<br />

2010/11 92 87 90 93 93<br />

2011/12 91 87 90 92 92<br />

2012/13 93 89 92 94 93<br />

2013/14 93 91 92 93 94<br />

2014/15 93 90 92 93 94<br />

Satisfaction with various measures relat<strong>in</strong>g to Dial-a-Ride are also excellent, with<br />

cleanl<strong>in</strong>ess of the <strong>in</strong>terior and helpfulness and c<strong>our</strong>tesy of the driver scor<strong>in</strong>g 94 out<br />

of 100 [16].<br />

Trams<br />

Overall satisfaction with trams is high among customers at 89 out of 100. This is<br />

higher among older users (93 out of 100 for 65 year olds) [16].<br />

Overall satisfaction with trams over time – all customers [16]<br />

Satisfaction score All 65+<br />

(0-100)<br />

Base 2014/15 (4,329) (905)<br />

2009/10 86 91<br />

2010/11 85 92<br />

2011/12 86 93<br />

2012/13 89 91<br />

2013/14 89 94<br />

2014/15 89 93<br />

Transport for London – Older People 148


Older People<br />

Streets<br />

Although older Londoners give higher satisfaction rat<strong>in</strong>gs than all Londoners on<br />

the various types of transport, older Londoners are less satisfied when it comes to<br />

their last walk<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney made on London’s streets. Fifty-seven per cent of<br />

Londoners aged 65 and over were satisfied with the streets and pavements after<br />

their last j<strong>our</strong>ney made on foot compared to 68 per cent of all Londoners. A similar<br />

pattern is observed for car users; 55 per cent of Londoners aged 65 or over are<br />

satisfied with their last car j<strong>our</strong>ney compared with 60 per cent of all Londoners<br />

[34].<br />

Overall satisfaction with streets and pavement after last j<strong>our</strong>ney over time – walk<strong>in</strong>g<br />

j<strong>our</strong>ney [34]<br />

Net fairly<br />

All 65+<br />

satisfied/very satisfied<br />

(%)<br />

Base 2014/15 (957) (255)<br />

2011 64 56<br />

2012 68 53<br />

2013 69 64<br />

2014 68 59<br />

2015 68 57<br />

Overall satisfaction with streets and pavements after last j<strong>our</strong>ney over time - car j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

[34]<br />

Net fairly<br />

All 65+<br />

satisfied/very satisfied<br />

(%)<br />

Base 2014/15 (830) (224)<br />

2011 54 55<br />

2012 62 63<br />

2013 57 55<br />

2014 61 52<br />

2015 60 55<br />

Overall satisfaction with streets and pavement after last j<strong>our</strong>ney over time - cycl<strong>in</strong>g<br />

j<strong>our</strong>ney [34]<br />

Net fairly<br />

All 65+<br />

satisfied/very satisfied<br />

(%)<br />

Base 2014/15 (357) (63)<br />

2014 54 45<br />

2015 46 29<br />

Transport for London – Older People 149


Older People<br />

Transport for London Road Network (TRLN)<br />

Satisfaction with the TLRN is reasonable to fairly good. Older users of the TLRN<br />

give a score of 80 out of 100 for walk<strong>in</strong>g, 74 out of 100 for <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g by bus on red<br />

routes and 70 out of 100 for driv<strong>in</strong>g. Satisfaction levels tend to be slightly higher<br />

among 65 year olds and over for the TLRN than for all customers [16].<br />

Overall satisfaction – general impression of red routes over time [16]<br />

Satisfaction score (0-100) All 65+<br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Base 2014-15 (1,254) (72)<br />

2013/14 70 71<br />

2014/15 68 80<br />

Travell<strong>in</strong>g by bus<br />

Base 2014-15 (4,620) (411)<br />

2013/14 69 72<br />

2014/15 71 74<br />

Driv<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Base 2014-15 (3,605) (390)<br />

2013/14 67 70<br />

2014/15 67 70<br />

Transport for London – Older People 150


Older People<br />

Access to <strong>in</strong>formation<br />

Access to the <strong>in</strong>ternet<br />

Londoners aged 65 and over are less likely to access the <strong>in</strong>ternet than all<br />

Londoners (64 per cent compared with 92 per cent). The proportion of Londoners<br />

access<strong>in</strong>g the <strong>in</strong>ternet drops considerably as people get older, with only 42 per<br />

cent of 80 year olds and over access<strong>in</strong>g the <strong>in</strong>ternet [15].<br />

Sixty-three per cent of older Londoners aged 65 or over access the <strong>in</strong>ternet at<br />

home, 15 per cent access it ‘on the move’ and six per cent at work [15].<br />

Use of the <strong>in</strong>ternet (Apr/ Oct 2014) [15]<br />

% All<br />

65+ 65-69 70-79 80+<br />

Londoners<br />

Base (2,001) (640) (212) (278) (150)<br />

Any access 92 64 82 62 42<br />

Access at home 89 63 80 61 41<br />

Access ‘on the move’ 61 15 24 14 5<br />

Access at work 56 6 12 3 1<br />

The top reasons for us<strong>in</strong>g the <strong>in</strong>ternet are broadly the same for older Londoners<br />

and all Londoners, although usage is slightly lower. The ma<strong>in</strong> reasons for use are:<br />

Email (92 per cent Londoners aged 65 or over compared with 94 per cent<br />

Londoners overall)<br />

F<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g and s<strong>our</strong>c<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>formation (87 per cent compared with 89 per cent<br />

overall)<br />

Access<strong>in</strong>g live <strong>travel</strong> <strong>in</strong>formation (70 per cent compared with 78 per cent<br />

overall)<br />

Maps and directions (76 per cent compared with 84 per cent overall)<br />

Buy<strong>in</strong>g goods and services (70 per cent compared with 79 per cent overall) [15]<br />

Londoners aged 65 and over who use the <strong>in</strong>ternet are less likely to use social<br />

media than all Londoners (30 per cent compared with 70 per cent all Londoners),<br />

and they’re less likely to use the <strong>in</strong>ternet for bank<strong>in</strong>g (46 per cent compared with<br />

68 per cent all Londoners) or for watch<strong>in</strong>g any video content (38 per cent<br />

compared with 63 per cent) [15].<br />

Transport for London – Older People 151


Older People<br />

Device usage and behavi<strong>our</strong><br />

Only twenty-five per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over use a smartphone<br />

compared with 77 per cent of all Londoners. Thirty-n<strong>in</strong>e per cent of 65 to 69 year<br />

olds use a smartphone, dropp<strong>in</strong>g to six per cent among Londoners aged 80 and<br />

over [15].<br />

Proportion of Londoners who use a smartphone (iPhone, BlackBerry, Android, other)<br />

(Apr/ Oct 2014) [15]<br />

% All 65+ 65-69 70-79 80+<br />

Base (2,001) (640) (212) (278) (150)<br />

Uses a smartphone 77 25 39 24 6<br />

Ownership of mobile devices is generally lower among Londoners aged 65 and<br />

over than all Londoners with the exception of standard mobile phones (55 per cent<br />

of 65 year olds or over use one compared with 20 per cent of all Londoners).<br />

<br />

<br />

Sixteen per cent use a tablet computer (compared to 37 per cent of all<br />

Londoners)<br />

Use of apps is lower among Londoners aged 65 and over who have a mobile<br />

device compared to younger age groups (73 per cent compared with 94 per<br />

cent of 16 to 24 year olds) [15]<br />

Us<strong>in</strong>g the TfL website<br />

Use of the TfL website is lower among older Londoners than all Londoners. Fortyseven<br />

per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over use the TfL website, compared with<br />

78 per cent of all Londoners. As with <strong>in</strong>ternet access statistics, the proportion of 65<br />

t0 69 year olds access<strong>in</strong>g the site is higher than Londoners from older age groups<br />

(67 per cent of those aged 65-69 compared with 44 per cent of 70 t0 79 year olds<br />

compared with 26 per cent of 80 year olds and over) [15].<br />

Proportion of Londoners who use www.tfl.gov.uk (Apr/ Oct 2014) [15]<br />

% All 65+ 65-69 70-79 80+<br />

Base (2,001) (640) (212) (278) (150)<br />

Uses TfL website 78 47 67 44 26<br />

Transport for London – Older People 152


Older People<br />

In l<strong>in</strong>e with the lower use of the TfL website among older Londoners, users aged<br />

65 and over tend to visit the website less frequently than all users. Only 13 per cent<br />

of Londoners aged 65 or over use the TfL website three to f<strong>our</strong> times a week or<br />

daily, compared with 30 per cent of all Londoners [15].<br />

Frequency of visit<strong>in</strong>g the TfL website (Apr/ Oct 2014) [15]<br />

% All 65+<br />

Base (2,001) (640)<br />

Use the TfL website<br />

78 47<br />

Daily 9 2<br />

Up to 3-4 times a week 21 11<br />

Up to 3-4 times a month 20 13<br />

About once a month 17 11<br />

Less than once a month 11 11<br />

Never 20 49<br />

Don’t know/ refused 2 4<br />

Older users of the TfL website are less likely than all users to use the website to<br />

plan a j<strong>our</strong>ney (65 per cent of website visitors aged 65 and over compared with 70<br />

per cent of all website visitors), do someth<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> relation to Oyster cards (12 per<br />

cent of website visitors aged 65 and over compared with 20 per cent of all website<br />

visitors) or f<strong>in</strong>d out about cycl<strong>in</strong>g (one per cent of website visitors aged 65 and<br />

over compared with three per cent of all website visitors) [37].<br />

Ma<strong>in</strong> purpose of today’s visit to the TfL website (2013) [37]<br />

% All 65+<br />

Base (28,278) (2,177)<br />

Us<strong>in</strong>g J<strong>our</strong>ney Planner to plan a route 68 63<br />

F<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g out live <strong>travel</strong> <strong>in</strong>formation 30 32<br />

F<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g out about planned works or closures 24 30<br />

Do<strong>in</strong>g someth<strong>in</strong>g related to Oyster cards or other tickets 20 12<br />

F<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g a map 15 16<br />

Do<strong>in</strong>g someth<strong>in</strong>g related to Congestion Charge 4 5<br />

F<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g out about cycl<strong>in</strong>g 3 1<br />

F<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g out about roads or driv<strong>in</strong>g 2 3<br />

Other 4 5<br />

Transport for London – Older People 153


Older People<br />

Access<strong>in</strong>g <strong>travel</strong> <strong>in</strong>formation <strong>in</strong> the event of <strong>travel</strong> disruption<br />

Older Londoners are less likely than all Londoners to obta<strong>in</strong> real-time London<br />

transport <strong>in</strong>formation (77 per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over would do this<br />

compared with 89 per cent all Londoners) [15].<br />

Older Londoners are less likely than all Londoners to access real-time London<br />

transport <strong>in</strong>formation on the TfL website (49 per cent of Londoners aged 65 or<br />

over, compared with 64 per cent of all Londoners) [15].<br />

Transport for London – Older People 154


Older People<br />

Work<strong>in</strong>g together<br />

Sub-regional mobility forums (SRMF)<br />

Build<strong>in</strong>g on the Mayor’s Transport Strategy and Accessibility Implementation Plan and<br />

TfL’s S<strong>in</strong>gle Equality Scheme (published <strong>in</strong> 2012), TfL has established sub-regional mobility<br />

forums <strong>in</strong> each of the five sub-regions laid out <strong>in</strong> the Mayor’s transport plan.<br />

To test the feasibility of such forums, we set up pilot schemes <strong>in</strong> two of the sub-regions<br />

(South and Central) and ran them on a pilot basis throughout 2013.<br />

The boroughs helped to identify older and disabled representatives to participate <strong>in</strong> their<br />

nearest SRMF, each of which is chaired by a member of TfL’s Independent Disability<br />

Advisory Group (IDAG).<br />

The purpose of the forums is to establish an effective work<strong>in</strong>g relationship that will meet<br />

the needs and aspirations of disabled and older people who attend the meet<strong>in</strong>gs, as well as<br />

borough representatives and TfL. They also provide a platform for dialogue on strategic<br />

<strong>travel</strong> and the transport issues that affect older and disabled people across each sub-region.<br />

We do not <strong>in</strong>tend for the sub-regional mobility forums to replace local mobility forums<br />

where they exist, or to replace any formal consultation that we should undertake across the<br />

TfL bus<strong>in</strong>ess. Instead, they provide us with an opportunity to seek the views of older and<br />

disabled Londoners on many <strong>travel</strong> and transport <strong>in</strong>itiatives that we have planned across<br />

the network.<br />

The pilots were a success and we are now roll<strong>in</strong>g out the forums to the rema<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g subregions<br />

(North, East and West).<br />

Key issues that have emerged so far from the South and Central regions <strong>in</strong>clude:<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

Pedestrian environment - for example, cross<strong>in</strong>gs, roads, pavements<br />

How <strong>in</strong>vestment <strong>in</strong> cycl<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>frastructure is hav<strong>in</strong>g a negative impact on the needs of<br />

pedestrians<br />

Signage and Legible London way-f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Step-free access on the Underground and Overground<br />

Staff tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g (bus and rail station staff)<br />

Intergenerational issues<br />

Travel <strong>in</strong>formation ‘on the move’<br />

Bus and bus stop design<br />

Wheelchair priority area on buses<br />

Transport for London – Older People 155


Younger People<br />

Summary: Younger people<br />

Key f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs<br />

Younger Londoners under the age of 25 make up 32 per cent of the Capital’s population.<br />

Among BAME Londoners, 41 per cent are under 25 [2]<br />

Londoners aged under 25 make fewer weekday trips than Londoners overall (2.4<br />

compared with 2.7 for all Londoners) [12]<br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g is the most commonly used type of transport by younger Londoners (99 per<br />

cent aged 24 and under walk at least once a week compared with 96 per cent all<br />

Londoners) [12]<br />

Younger Londoners cite the same ma<strong>in</strong> barriers to greater public transport use as all<br />

Londoners: overcrowd<strong>in</strong>g, slow j<strong>our</strong>ney times and cost [14]<br />

Londoners aged 16-24 are slightly more likely than average to have experienced a<br />

<br />

recent worry<strong>in</strong>g episode on public transport [14]<br />

Younger Londoners’ satisfaction with public transport is <strong>in</strong> l<strong>in</strong>e with that given by<br />

Londoners as a whole [16]<br />

Younger Londoners are more likely to own a smartphone than Londoners overall (96<br />

per cent compared with 77 per cent) [15]<br />

Research with younger people<br />

The research that we present <strong>in</strong> this chapter <strong>in</strong>cludes a range of age groups, and<br />

we have noted the specific age ranges covered for each data s<strong>our</strong>ce.<br />

This chapter focuses on Londoners under the age of 25. However, <strong>travel</strong> patterns<br />

and priorities vary considerably with<strong>in</strong> this age group as school stage and the<br />

desire for <strong>in</strong>dependence changes [56].<br />

Profile of younger Londoners<br />

Londoners aged under 25 make up 32 per cent of the population. Twenty per cent<br />

are aged 15 or under, and 12 per cent are aged between 16 and 24 [2].<br />

With<strong>in</strong> this younger age group (under 25) the proportion of boys/men and<br />

girls/women is practically equal; 49 per cent are girls/women [2].<br />

Younger Londoners are more likely to be from a BAME group than all Londoners.<br />

Fifty-f<strong>our</strong> per cent of 0 to 15 year olds and 48 per cent of 16 to 24 year olds are<br />

from a BAME group [2].<br />

Younger people are more likely to be <strong>in</strong> education (54 per cent of 16 to 24 year<br />

olds) and less likely to be <strong>in</strong> full or part-time employment than all Londoners (32<br />

per cent of 16 to 24 year olds are <strong>in</strong> work compared with 58 per cent of all<br />

Londoners) [12].<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 156


Younger People<br />

Transport behavi<strong>our</strong><br />

Younger Londoners tend to make fewer trips than all Londoners on an average<br />

weekday (2.4 among Londoners under 25 compared with 2.7 all Londoners) [12].<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g is the most commonly used type of transport for younger Londoners,<br />

with 99 per cent aged 24 and under walk<strong>in</strong>g at least once a week [12]<br />

The bus is the next most commonly used transport type for younger<br />

Londoners. Among Londoners aged 11-15, 81 per cent use the bus at least once<br />

a week, compared with 61 per cent of all Londoners [12]<br />

Travell<strong>in</strong>g as a car passenger is a frequently used method of transport for<br />

younger Londoners, especially for under 16 year olds (77 per cent of 5 to 10<br />

year olds and 75 per cent of 11 to 15 year olds are car passengers at least once a<br />

week) [12]<br />

Londoners under the age of 25 are less likely than Londoners overall to use the<br />

Tube (33 per cent under 25 compared with 39 per cent all Londoners) and<br />

National Rail (13 per cent compared with 17 per cent) at least once a week.<br />

However among 16 to 24 year olds, use of the Tube (52 per cent) and National<br />

Rail (21 per cent) is higher than across all under 25 year olds [12]<br />

Forty-two per cent of j<strong>our</strong>neys made by Londoners under the age of 25 are for<br />

education compared with 19 per cent for Londoners overall [12]<br />

Among 16 to 24 year olds the proportion mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>neys for work-related<br />

reasons is lower than the proportion of all Londoners mak<strong>in</strong>g these trips (21<br />

per cent compared with 28 per cent for all Londoners) [12]<br />

Younger Londoners are much more likely than all Londoners to possess a pass<br />

or card that entitles them to free or reduced <strong>travel</strong> (32 per cent aged under 25<br />

possess a free bus <strong>travel</strong> pass compared with n<strong>in</strong>e per cent of all Londoners).<br />

This is particularly high for people aged 11-15 (83 per cent possess a free <strong>travel</strong><br />

bus pass) [12]<br />

The most common way to <strong>travel</strong> to school is to walk. Forty-f<strong>our</strong> per cent of people<br />

aged under 16 walk as their ma<strong>in</strong> mode to school. This rises to 54 per cent for<br />

young people aged 10 and under [12]. Younger age groups tend to live closer to<br />

school, with 5 to 10 year olds <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g 1.6 miles on average to reach school,<br />

compared with 3.7 miles for 11 to 16 year olds [54].<br />

Barriers<br />

Overcrowd<strong>in</strong>g, slow j<strong>our</strong>neys and cost are the three most common barriers to<br />

greater public transport use cited by younger Londoners. This is <strong>in</strong> common with<br />

all Londoners (65 per cent of 16 to 24 year olds say overcrowded services are a<br />

barrier, 50 per cent slow j<strong>our</strong>neys and 49 per cent cost of tickets) [14].<br />

Young Londoners are slightly more likely to have experienced a worry<strong>in</strong>g event<br />

whilst <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g on public transport <strong>in</strong> London, <strong>in</strong> the last three months (20 per<br />

cent of 16 to 24 year olds compared with 17 per cent of all Londoners) [14].<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 157


Younger People<br />

Younger Londoners who have experienced a worry<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>cident <strong>in</strong> the three<br />

months prior to be<strong>in</strong>g surveyed were much more likely to have experienced this<br />

dur<strong>in</strong>g night-time (71 per cent of the most recent episodes of worry were<br />

experienced at night compared with 58 per cent among all Londoners who have<br />

experienced a worry<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>cident) [14].<br />

Customer satisfaction<br />

Levels of satisfaction among 16 to 24 year old customers on the transport network<br />

are <strong>in</strong> l<strong>in</strong>e with all customers’ scores, with very few differences <strong>in</strong> the satisfaction<br />

levels that we observed [16].<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

Overall satisfaction with buses is good at 84 out 100. The key drivers of overall<br />

satisfaction with buses are how long the j<strong>our</strong>ney took, ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>neys<br />

and the comfort <strong>in</strong>side the bus [16]<br />

Tube satisfaction is fairly high at 85 out of 100. Satisfaction among Tube users<br />

is driven largely by ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>neys, comfort and j<strong>our</strong>ney time [16]<br />

Satisfaction with value for money is consistently lower than overall satisfaction<br />

for all transport types [16]<br />

Access to <strong>in</strong>formation<br />

Access to the <strong>in</strong>ternet is almost universal among young Londoners (99 per cent of<br />

16 to 24 year olds access the <strong>in</strong>ternet compared with 92 per cent of all Londoners).<br />

The use of smartphones among Londoners aged 16-24 is very high (96 per cent<br />

compared with 77 per cent all Londoners) [15].<br />

Among Londoners aged 16-24, 83 per cent claim to access the TfL website<br />

compared to 78 per cent of all Londoners [15].<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 158


Younger People<br />

Introduction<br />

For many younger people, <strong>travel</strong> represents a gateway to adulthood, enabl<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>in</strong>dependence, socialisation and a recognition of maturity. Children may be<br />

access<strong>in</strong>g transport with an adult, but as Londoners get older they start to <strong>travel</strong><br />

more with friends and on their own [56].<br />

Comb<strong>in</strong>ed with the high proportion of younger people <strong>in</strong> education rather than<br />

employment, this means that <strong>travel</strong> patterns can differ from the wider London<br />

population.<br />

Throughout this chapter, we focus on Londoners under the age of 25. Where<br />

possible, we have broken data down to reveal differences by those aged 5-10, 11-<br />

15 and 16-24. In some cases, data is not available to provide this breakdown and<br />

therefore age groups are shown as close to this breakdown as possible.<br />

Note that the differences highlighted between young people <strong>in</strong> this chapter may<br />

well be <strong>in</strong>fluenced by a number of factors other than age, with gender, <strong>in</strong>come,<br />

work<strong>in</strong>g status and education all affect<strong>in</strong>g perceptions towards <strong>travel</strong> <strong>in</strong> London<br />

and <strong>travel</strong> behavi<strong>our</strong>.<br />

Market research best practice imposes a number of limitations when <strong>in</strong>terview<strong>in</strong>g<br />

people under the age of 16. While some surveys do <strong>in</strong>clude this audience (after<br />

parental permission is ga<strong>in</strong>ed) many limit themselves to those aged 16 or over.<br />

<br />

<br />

Throughout the report, we have noted the ages covered by each data po<strong>in</strong>t<br />

Please note that LTDS data reported <strong>in</strong> this document does not <strong>in</strong>clude results<br />

from children under five years old<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 159


Younger People<br />

Profile of younger Londoners<br />

Thirty-two per cent of the London population is aged 24 years old or under, 20 per<br />

cent are 15 years old and under, and 12 per cent are aged between 16 and 24 years<br />

old [2].<br />

Age profile of Londoners (2011 Census) [2]<br />

% 2011 Census<br />

Proportion who are<br />

girls/<br />

women<br />

0-4 7 49<br />

5-9 6 49<br />

10-15 7 49<br />

16-24 12 50<br />

25-64 57 50<br />

65+ 11 56<br />

While for Londoners <strong>in</strong> older age groups there is a higher proportion of women<br />

than men, <strong>in</strong> younger age groups the proportions are more even, with 49 per cent<br />

of Londoners aged under 25 be<strong>in</strong>g girls or women and 51 per cent be<strong>in</strong>g boys or<br />

men [2].<br />

The ma<strong>in</strong> differences between all Londoners and younger Londoners relate to<br />

ethnicity, work<strong>in</strong>g status and disability levels. Among younger Londoners (aged<br />

under 25), 51 per cent are BAME Londoners compared with 40 per cent of all<br />

Londoners. With each progressively younger age group, the proportion of BAME<br />

Londoners <strong>in</strong>creases [2].<br />

While 11 per cent of all Londoners def<strong>in</strong>e themselves as disabled, the figure for<br />

Londoners aged under 25 is f<strong>our</strong> per cent [12].<br />

With<strong>in</strong> this document there are two ma<strong>in</strong> s<strong>our</strong>ces of demographic data: the Office<br />

for National Statistics 2011 Census and the London Travel Demand Survey. The<br />

follow<strong>in</strong>g table shows the demographic breakdown of Londoners recorded <strong>in</strong> the<br />

LTDS. Data from both s<strong>our</strong>ces are <strong>in</strong> l<strong>in</strong>e with each other. However there may be<br />

differences to specific reported numbers or proportions between s<strong>our</strong>ces due to<br />

methodological and tim<strong>in</strong>g differences.<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 160


Younger People<br />

LTDS demographic profile of younger Londoners (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All Aged 24 & 5-10 11-15 16-24<br />

Londoners under<br />

Base (15,700) (4,220) (1,417) (954) (1,849)<br />

Gender<br />

Men 49 51 52 52 50<br />

Women 51 49 48 48 50<br />

Ethnicity<br />

White 62 52 47 52 55<br />

BAME 37 47 52 47 44<br />

Household <strong>in</strong>come<br />

Less than £10,000 17 20 21 19 20<br />

£10,000–£19,999 19 21 22 22 20<br />

£20,000–£34,999 20 20 20 19 21<br />

£35,000–£49,999 13 12 12 12 12<br />

£50,000–£74,999 15 14 13 14 14<br />

£75,000+ 16 13 13 14 13<br />

Work<strong>in</strong>g status*<br />

Work<strong>in</strong>g full-time 47 24<br />

Work<strong>in</strong>g part-time 11 8<br />

Student 10 54<br />

Retired 15 -<br />

Not work<strong>in</strong>g 16 12<br />

Disabled<br />

Yes 11 4 3 3 4<br />

No 89 96 97 97 96<br />

Impairment affects <strong>travel</strong><br />

Yes 10 3 3 3 3<br />

No 90 97 97 97 97<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five and work<strong>in</strong>g status does not <strong>in</strong>clude under 16s.<br />

All TfL surveys use the Equality Act 2010 to def<strong>in</strong>e disabled people as those who def<strong>in</strong>e themselves as hav<strong>in</strong>g a long-term physical or mental<br />

disability or health issue that impacts on their daily activities, the work they can do, or limits their ability to <strong>travel</strong><br />

Transport for London – Younger People 161


Younger People<br />

Ethnicity<br />

One of the largest differences <strong>in</strong> the profile of younger Londoners compared with<br />

all Londoners is <strong>in</strong> terms of ethnicity. This is particularly evident for Londoners<br />

under 16; 54 per cent of this age group are BAME Londoners [2].<br />

Children aged 0-15 are considerably more likely to be from the African ethnic<br />

group than all Londoners; 11 per cent of children aged 0-15 liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> London are<br />

from the African ethnic group compared with seven per cent of all Londoners [2].<br />

Ethnicity by age [2]<br />

Age group<br />

Ethnic group % All 0-15 16-24 0-24<br />

White: total 60 46 53 49<br />

English/Welsh/Scottish/Northern Irish/British 45 36 41 38<br />

Irish 2 1 1 1<br />

Gypsy or Irish Traveller - - - -<br />

Other white 13 9 11 10<br />

Black/African/Caribbean/black British: total 13 19 15 17<br />

African 7 11 8 10<br />

Caribbean 4 4 4 4<br />

Other black 2 4 2 3<br />

Asian/Asian British: total 18 20 22 21<br />

Indian 7 5 7 6<br />

Pakistani 3 4 4 4<br />

Bangladeshi 3 4 4 4<br />

Ch<strong>in</strong>ese 2 1 3 2<br />

Other Asian 5 5 5 5<br />

Mixed/multiple ethnic group: total 5 11 7 9<br />

White and black Caribbean 1 3 2 3<br />

White and black African 1 2 1 1<br />

White and Asian 1 3 2 2<br />

Other Mixed 1 3 2 2<br />

Other ethnic group: total 3 4 4 4<br />

Arab 1 2 2 2<br />

Any other ethnic group 2 2 2 2<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 162


Younger People<br />

Employment and <strong>in</strong>come<br />

Accord<strong>in</strong>g to the LTDS, 54 per cent of 16 to 24 year old Londoners are students, 24<br />

per cent are employed full-time and eight per cent are employed part-time [12].<br />

Data from the Census shows that a similar proportion of younger Londoners are<br />

employed full-time. However, the Census <strong>in</strong>dicates more part-time and<br />

economically <strong>in</strong>active Londoners than the data from LTDS [2]. This is likely to be<br />

due to the different def<strong>in</strong>itions of employment status and economic activity<br />

between the two datasets.<br />

Census economic activity among Londoners aged 16+ [2]<br />

% All Londoners 16-24<br />

Full-time employment 46 26<br />

Part-time employment 16 18<br />

Unemployed 6 12<br />

Economically <strong>in</strong>active 33 44<br />

Younger Londoners are marg<strong>in</strong>ally more likely to have a lower household <strong>in</strong>come<br />

than all Londoners. Among Londoners aged under 25, 41 per cent have household<br />

<strong>in</strong>come less than £20,000, compared to 36 per cent of all Londoners [12].<br />

London boroughs<br />

The boroughs with the highest proportion of younger residents are:<br />

London boroughs with the highest proportion of younger residents [12]<br />

Borough<br />

% of younger residents<br />

Bark<strong>in</strong>g and Dagenham 36<br />

Newham 32<br />

Tower Hamlets 32<br />

Isl<strong>in</strong>gton 31<br />

Camden 31<br />

Enfield 31<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 163


Younger People<br />

The boroughs with the lowest proportion of younger residents are:<br />

London boroughs with the lowest proportion of younger residents [12]<br />

Borough<br />

% of younger residents<br />

City of London 6<br />

Merton 24<br />

Wandsworth 24<br />

Kens<strong>in</strong>gton and Chelsea 24<br />

Sutton 25<br />

Bromley 25<br />

Richmond upon Thames 25<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 164


Younger People<br />

Travel behavi<strong>our</strong><br />

Younger Londoners tend to make fewer trips per weekday than Londoners overall.<br />

Londoners aged under 25 make an average of 2.4 weekday trips compared to 2.7<br />

trips per weekday made by all Londoners.<br />

Average number of weekday trips (2013/14) [12]<br />

Average number of<br />

weekday trips<br />

Londoners aged 5-10 2.4<br />

Londoners aged 11-15 2.3<br />

Londoners aged 16-24 2.4<br />

Londoners aged 5-24 2.4<br />

All Londoners 2.7<br />

Transport types used<br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g is the most common type of transport used by younger Londoners (aged<br />

under 25); almost all (99 per cent) walk at least once a week [12].<br />

After walk<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g by bus is the most common transport option for all<br />

Londoners and for younger Londoners; 61 per cent of all Londoners use the bus at<br />

least once a week compared with 71 per cent of Londoners aged under 25. Bus use<br />

among 16 to 24 year olds is higher, with 80 per cent us<strong>in</strong>g the bus each week [12].<br />

Travell<strong>in</strong>g by car as a passenger decreases as younger Londoners achieve greater<br />

<strong>in</strong>dependence. Around three-quarters of Londoners aged under 16 (76 per cent)<br />

<strong>travel</strong> by car as a passenger each week compared with 55 per cent of Londoners<br />

between the age of 16 and 24 [12].<br />

For both National Rail and the Underground, higher proportions of people aged<br />

16-24 use these types of transport at least once a week than all Londoners. For<br />

National Rail, 17 per cent of all Londoners use the service at least once week<br />

compared to 21 per cent for Londoners aged 16-24. For the Underground, 39 per<br />

cent of all Londoners use the service at least once a week compared to 52 per cent<br />

of Londoners aged 16-24 [12].<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 165


Younger People<br />

Proportion of Londoners us<strong>in</strong>g types of transport at least once a week (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All<br />

Aged 24 &<br />

under<br />

5-10 11-15 16-24<br />

Base (15,700) (4,220) (1,417) (954) (1,849)<br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g 96 99 99 99 98<br />

Bus 61 71 48 81 80<br />

Car (as a passenger) 48 66 77 75 55<br />

Car (as a driver) 39 8 - - 17<br />

Tube 39 33 11 17 52<br />

National Rail 17 13 3 6 21<br />

Overground 9 8 4 6 12<br />

Other taxi/m<strong>in</strong>icab (PHV) 6 6 4 2 8<br />

London taxi/black cab 5 2 1 1 4<br />

DLR 4 4 2 2 7<br />

Tram (London Traml<strong>in</strong>k) 2 2 1 3 2<br />

Motorbike 1 - - - 1<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Where there is more detailed <strong>in</strong>formation on <strong>in</strong>dividual types of transport, we<br />

have <strong>in</strong>cluded a sub-section below.<br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Almost all Londoners walk at least once a week. Younger Londoners are more<br />

likely to walk almost every day (5+ days a week) with 92 per cent of Londoners<br />

aged under 25 stat<strong>in</strong>g this compared with 83 per cent of all Londoners [12].<br />

Frequency of walk<strong>in</strong>g (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All<br />

Aged 24 &<br />

under<br />

5-10 11-15 16-24<br />

Base (15,700) (4,220) (1,417) (954) (1,849)<br />

5 or more days a week 83 92 91 95 90<br />

3 or 4 days a week 6 3 3 2 4<br />

2 days a week 4 2 3 2 2<br />

1 day a week 3 1 2 1 1<br />

At least once a fortnight 1 - - - -<br />

At least once a month 1 - - - -<br />

At least once a year 1 - - - 1<br />

Not used <strong>in</strong> last year 1 - - - -<br />

Never used - - - - -<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 166


Younger People<br />

We asked Londoners how often they walk for various purposes. The table below<br />

compares the proportions of all Londoners and 16 to 24 year old Londoners<br />

mak<strong>in</strong>g each type of walk<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney at least once a week. A higher proportion of<br />

16 to 24 year olds make every type of j<strong>our</strong>ney at least once a week, except runn<strong>in</strong>g<br />

errands [19].<br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g at least once a week by purpose of j<strong>our</strong>ney (2015) [19]<br />

% who walk at least once a week to… All 16-24<br />

Base (1,000) (69)<br />

Walk…<br />

As part of a longer j<strong>our</strong>ney 77 84<br />

To complete small errands such as gett<strong>in</strong>g a<br />

newspaper or post<strong>in</strong>g a letter<br />

86 81<br />

To get to work/school/college 52 78<br />

To visit friends and relatives 49 58<br />

To visit pubs/restaurants/c<strong>in</strong>emas and other<br />

social places<br />

53 53<br />

To take a child to school 18 25<br />

Bus<br />

Regular bus use is common among younger Londoners. Seventy-one per cent of<br />

Londoners under 25 years old use the bus at least once a week and 40 per cent use<br />

the bus almost every day (5+ times a week) [12]. For some young people <strong>in</strong><br />

London, the bus offers a more social form of transport (while not be<strong>in</strong>g as<br />

expensive as other social types of transport such as the Tube) [56].<br />

‘We like to get the bus because you can catch up and have a good chat.’ (Girl, 15<br />

years old)<br />

‘We just like hang<strong>in</strong>g out with <strong>our</strong> friends on the back of the bus.’ (Boy, 15 years<br />

old) [56]<br />

Frequency of <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g by bus (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All<br />

Aged 24 &<br />

under<br />

5-10 11-15 16-24<br />

Base (15,700) (4,220) (1,417) (954) (1,849)<br />

5 or more days a week 28 40 17 53 47<br />

3 or 4 days a week 12 11 6 10 14<br />

2 days a week 11 10 12 9 10<br />

1 day a week 10 10 13 9 8<br />

At least once a fortnight 5 4 6 3 3<br />

At least once a month 10 9 15 6 6<br />

At least once a year 14 12 24 8 7<br />

Not used <strong>in</strong> last year 7 3 4 2 3<br />

Never used 2 1 3 1 1<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 167


Younger People<br />

Londoners aged 16-19 are more likely to <strong>travel</strong> by bus for school or education and<br />

to visit friends and relatives both dur<strong>in</strong>g the day and at night, compared to all bus<br />

users. However, they are less likely to <strong>travel</strong> by bus for work purposes than bus<br />

users overall [28].<br />

Purpose of bus j<strong>our</strong>ney by age and time of day (2014) [28]<br />

Dur<strong>in</strong>g the day<br />

At night<br />

% All Aged 16-19 All Aged 16-19<br />

Base (weighted) (37,585) (3,574) (9,121) (862)<br />

To/from or for work 53 22 53 28<br />

To/from<br />

school/education<br />

7 36 4 13<br />

To/from shopp<strong>in</strong>g 11 8 1 2<br />

Visit<strong>in</strong>g<br />

friends/relatives<br />

9 13 13 20<br />

Leisure 9 11 21 23<br />

Personal bus<strong>in</strong>ess 7 5 2 6<br />

Other purpose 3 5 6 10<br />

Car<br />

Travell<strong>in</strong>g as a passenger <strong>in</strong> a car is common among younger Londoners. Two<br />

thirds (66 per cent) <strong>travel</strong> this way at least once a week. Travell<strong>in</strong>g by car as a<br />

passenger is much more frequent among Londoners under the age of 16; 76 per<br />

cent of Londoners aged between five and 15 are car passengers at least once a<br />

week [12].<br />

Thirty-f<strong>our</strong> per cent of Londoners aged 17-24 hold a full driv<strong>in</strong>g licence; this<br />

compares to 64 per cent of all Londoners [12].<br />

Proportion of Londoners aged 17 and over with a full car driv<strong>in</strong>g licence (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All 17-24 25+<br />

Base (13,127) (1,647) (11,480)<br />

Holds a full car driv<strong>in</strong>g licence 64 34 69<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 168


Younger People<br />

Londoners aged 16-24 are marg<strong>in</strong>ally less likely to live <strong>in</strong> a household with access<br />

to a car than all Londoners (59 per cent of 16 to 24 year olds compared with 66 per<br />

cent of all Londoners). Younger Londoners however - those aged between 5 and<br />

16 years old - are more likely to have access to car [12].<br />

Proportion of Londoners <strong>in</strong> a household with access to a car (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All 5-16 16-24<br />

Base (15,700) (2,371) (1,849)<br />

0 cars 35 29 41<br />

1 car 46 53 35<br />

2+ cars 20 17 24<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Tube<br />

Thirty-three per cent of younger Londoners use the Tube at least once a week,<br />

which is lower than the proportion for all Londoners (39 per cent). Broadly, the<br />

propensity to use the TTube at least once a week among younger Londoners<br />

<strong>in</strong>creases with age; 16 to 24 year olds are the most likely to use the Tube at least<br />

once a week (52 per cent of 16 to 24 year olds use the Tube at least once a week<br />

compared with 17 per cent of 11 to 15 year olds and 11 per cent of 5 to 10 year olds)<br />

[12].<br />

Frequency of <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g by Tube (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All<br />

Aged 24 &<br />

under<br />

5-10 11-15 16-24<br />

Base (15,700) (4,220) (1,417) (954) (1,849)<br />

5 or more days a week 15 11 - 3 21<br />

3 or 4 days a week 7 6 1 1 11<br />

2 days a week 8 6 2 5 9<br />

1 day a week 9 9 8 8 10<br />

At least once a fortnight 8 7 7 6 7<br />

At least once a month 15 17 18 19 15<br />

At least once a year 25 31 44 43 19<br />

Not used <strong>in</strong> last year 11 8 11 10 5<br />

Never used 3 4 8 4 2<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 169


Younger People<br />

Cycl<strong>in</strong>g<br />

The same proportion of younger Londoners (aged 16-24) as all Londoners<br />

sometimes cycle <strong>in</strong> London; 18 per cent of 16 to 24 year olds sometimes use a<br />

bicycle to get around London. F<strong>our</strong>teen per cent of younger Londoners cycle<br />

regularly (at least once a week) <strong>in</strong> London [17].<br />

Proportion of Londoners who cycle (November 2014) [17]<br />

% All 16-24<br />

Base (2,192) (281)<br />

Cyclist (sometimes uses a bike to get around<br />

London)<br />

Non-cyclist (never uses a bike to get around<br />

London)<br />

17<br />

83<br />

18<br />

82<br />

The frequency of cycl<strong>in</strong>g among 16 to 24 year old Londoners is <strong>in</strong> l<strong>in</strong>e with the<br />

frequency among all Londoners [17].<br />

Frequency of <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g by bicycle (November 2014) [17]<br />

% All 16-24<br />

Base (2,192) (281)<br />

5 or more days a week 4 4<br />

3 or 4 days a week 5 3<br />

2 days a week 3 3<br />

1 day a week 2 3<br />

At least once a fortnight 1 -<br />

At least once a month 1 1<br />

At least once a year 2 3<br />

Not used <strong>in</strong> last year - -<br />

Never used 83 82<br />

Most Londoners know how to ride a bike (83 per cent of all Londoners can ride a<br />

bicycle). The proportion is even higher among younger Londoners aged 16-24 (88<br />

per cent of 16 to 24 year olds can ride a bicycle) [17].<br />

Proportion of Londoners able to ride a bike (November 2014) [17]<br />

% All 16-24<br />

Base (2,192) (281)<br />

Can ride a bike 83 88<br />

Cannot ride a bike 17 12<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 170


Younger People<br />

TfL has developed a behavi<strong>our</strong>al change model to look at Londoners’ read<strong>in</strong>ess to<br />

cycle or cycle more. Sixty-n<strong>in</strong>e per cent of Londoners classified themselves as<br />

be<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the ‘pre-contemplation’ category (def<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>in</strong> the table below). Younger<br />

Londoners are equally likely to be <strong>in</strong> the ‘pre-contemplation’ stage as the all<br />

Londoners average (64 per cent among 16 to 24 year olds and 69 per cent among<br />

all Londoners) [17].<br />

A slightly higher proportion of younger Londoners are <strong>in</strong> the ‘contemplation’<br />

phase (15 per cent of 16 to 24 year olds compared with 10 per cent of all<br />

Londoners); this phase relates to th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g about cycl<strong>in</strong>g soon.<br />

A similar proportion of 16-24 year olds to all Londoners (n<strong>in</strong>e per cent compared<br />

with 10 per cent all Londoners) are classified as be<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the ‘susta<strong>in</strong>ed change’<br />

category, mean<strong>in</strong>g that they started cycl<strong>in</strong>g a while ago and are still do<strong>in</strong>g it<br />

occasionally or regularly [17].<br />

Behavi<strong>our</strong> change model of cycl<strong>in</strong>g (November 2014) [17]<br />

% All 16-24<br />

Base (all) (2,192) (281)<br />

Pre-contemplation:<br />

‘You have never thought about it, but would be unlikely to start <strong>in</strong> the future’<br />

‘You have thought about it, but don’t <strong>in</strong>tend start<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the future’<br />

‘You have never thought about it, but could be open to it <strong>in</strong> the future’<br />

Contemplation:<br />

‘You are th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g about start<strong>in</strong>g soon’<br />

Preparation:<br />

‘You have decided to start soon’<br />

Change:<br />

‘You have tried to start recently, but am f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g it difficult’<br />

‘You have started recently and am f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g it quite easy so far’<br />

Susta<strong>in</strong>ed change:<br />

‘You started a while ago and am still do<strong>in</strong>g it occasionally’<br />

‘You started a while ago and am still do<strong>in</strong>g it regularly’<br />

Lapsed:<br />

‘You started do<strong>in</strong>g this but couldn’t stick to it’<br />

69 64<br />

10 15<br />

3 3<br />

2 3<br />

10 9<br />

6 7<br />

Among younger people who do not cycle, there are several perceived barriers. For<br />

some people aged 16-19, cycl<strong>in</strong>g is strongly associated with childhood and<br />

therefore they are keen to distance themselves from this youthful association. For<br />

others, us<strong>in</strong>g a bike to <strong>travel</strong> can limit spontaneity and is less sociable than other<br />

transport types such as the bus. Other possible barriers focus on the cost of buy<strong>in</strong>g<br />

and ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g a bike, and the possibility of gett<strong>in</strong>g dirty/mess<strong>in</strong>g up cloth<strong>in</strong>g<br />

and hair through cycl<strong>in</strong>g [57].<br />

A key barrier to younger Londoners cycl<strong>in</strong>g, particularly younger children, is the<br />

perceived safety of the cycl<strong>in</strong>g environment by parents. This rema<strong>in</strong>s a strong<br />

barrier, even when the parent perceives their child to be a skilful cyclist [63].<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 171


Younger People<br />

Cycl<strong>in</strong>g schemes<br />

Most Londoners aged between 16 and 24 are aware of Cycle Hire (85 per cent), but<br />

this is a little bit lower than the proportion of all Londoners (91 per cent) [17].<br />

Thirty-two per cent of casual Cycle Hire users (def<strong>in</strong>ed as not hav<strong>in</strong>g a Cycle Hire<br />

key) are aged between 16 and 24 but only three per cent of members are aged 16-<br />

24 [58].<br />

Thirty-eight per cent of younger Londoners say that they are likely to use Cycle<br />

Hire <strong>in</strong> the future, a higher proportion than Londoners overall (27 per cent) [17].<br />

Expected use of Cycle Hire <strong>in</strong> future (November 2014) [17]<br />

% All 16-24<br />

Base (1,180) (148)<br />

Yes, def<strong>in</strong>itely/ probably 27 38<br />

Yes, def<strong>in</strong>itely 9 12<br />

Yes, probably 18 26<br />

No, probably not 30 30<br />

No, def<strong>in</strong>itely not 33 22<br />

Not sure 10 10<br />

Awareness of Cycle Superhighways among younger Londoners is lower than<br />

among all Londoners; 42 per cent of Londoners aged 16-24 are aware of the<br />

scheme, compared with 61 per cent of all Londoners [17].<br />

Expected future use of Cycle Superhighways is similar for younger Londoners<br />

(aged 16-24) as for all Londoners; 17 per cent say that they are likely to use Cycle<br />

Superhighways <strong>in</strong> the future compared to 23 per cent of all Londoners [17].<br />

Expected use of Cycle Superhighways (November 2014) [17]<br />

% All 16-24<br />

Base (1,180) (148)<br />

Yes, def<strong>in</strong>itely/ probably 23 17<br />

Yes, def<strong>in</strong>itely 6 5<br />

Yes, probably 17 12<br />

No, probably not 28 38<br />

No, def<strong>in</strong>itely not 31 23<br />

Not sure 17 22<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 172


Younger People<br />

Cycl<strong>in</strong>g education<br />

We manage a number of <strong>in</strong>itiatives that are aimed at enc<strong>our</strong>ag<strong>in</strong>g cycl<strong>in</strong>g,<br />

particularly for younger Londoners. These <strong>in</strong>clude direct support for education<br />

res<strong>our</strong>ces such as the Children’s Traffic Club, as well as support<strong>in</strong>g cycl<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>in</strong>itiatives with<strong>in</strong> schools and colleges such as the Junior Travel Ambassadors<br />

programme.<br />

At least 95 per cent of London’s schools have established school <strong>travel</strong> plans.<br />

These set out how the school can enc<strong>our</strong>age safe susta<strong>in</strong>able <strong>travel</strong> among the<br />

whole school community. Around half of London’s schools have signed up to<br />

STAR, the School Travel Accredited and Recognised scheme, which recognises<br />

schools that actively address the challenges of their <strong>travel</strong> plan. Seventy-one per<br />

cent of participat<strong>in</strong>g STAR schools reported that cycl<strong>in</strong>g had <strong>in</strong>creased s<strong>in</strong>ce they<br />

participated <strong>in</strong> the scheme and 86 per cent said that walk<strong>in</strong>g had <strong>in</strong>creased. Most<br />

schools put this down to the STAR programme at least <strong>in</strong> part [59].<br />

S<strong>in</strong>ce 2006, TfL has funded Bike It, an <strong>in</strong>itiative to enc<strong>our</strong>age cycl<strong>in</strong>g with<strong>in</strong> the<br />

school environment. Bike It officers now work <strong>in</strong> more than 100 schools. In Bike It<br />

schools, six per cent of j<strong>our</strong>neys to and from school are made by bike compared<br />

with three per cent at non-Bike It schools [60].<br />

J<strong>our</strong>ney purpose<br />

Travel choices are thought to change through two key stages <strong>in</strong> younger people’s<br />

lives. The first transition occurs with the shift from primary to secondary<br />

education. Key determ<strong>in</strong>ants of <strong>travel</strong> choices at this stage are to do with<br />

<strong>in</strong>dependence and peer <strong>in</strong>fluence. For many young people, <strong>travel</strong> enables<br />

<strong>in</strong>dependence, socialisation and recognition of maturity. Younger Londoners aged<br />

between 11 and 15 <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>gly <strong>travel</strong> <strong>in</strong>dependently, although they may have<br />

limited knowledge of public transport [56].<br />

When people reach the age of 16 to 18, <strong>travel</strong> becomes less orientated around<br />

hav<strong>in</strong>g fun and is perceived as a means to an end, at which po<strong>in</strong>t practicalities<br />

(such as cost and speed of j<strong>our</strong>ney) become more important <strong>in</strong> determ<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>travel</strong><br />

choices [56].<br />

Three-fifths of the j<strong>our</strong>neys made by Londoners aged between five and 15 are for<br />

education-related reasons. Shopp<strong>in</strong>g and personal bus<strong>in</strong>ess trips are more<br />

common among Londoners aged 16-24 than those under 16 [12].<br />

Among Londoners aged 16-24, 15 per cent of weekday j<strong>our</strong>neys are to <strong>travel</strong> to<br />

and from a usual place of work and a further six per cent are for other work-related<br />

reasons [12].<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 173


Younger People<br />

Weekday j<strong>our</strong>ney purpose (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All Aged 24 &<br />

under<br />

Base – all trips by Londoners<br />

5-10 11-15 16-24<br />

Shopp<strong>in</strong>g/personal bus<strong>in</strong>ess 24 16 13 13 20<br />

Usual workplace 20 7 - - 15<br />

Leisure 23 26 22 24 29<br />

Education 19 42 59 60 25<br />

Other work-related 8 3 - - 6<br />

Other 6 5 5 4 5<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Travel to/from school<br />

The most common form of transport to and from school among Londoners aged<br />

under 16 is walk<strong>in</strong>g. Forty-f<strong>our</strong> per cent of school j<strong>our</strong>neys are made on foot [12].<br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g is more common among children aged between 5 and 10 than those aged<br />

between 11 and 15 (54 per cent among 5 to 10 year olds compared with 31 per cent<br />

among 11 to 15 year olds) [12].<br />

The proportion of younger Londoners us<strong>in</strong>g the bus to get to and from school also<br />

changes between children aged 5-10 and 11-15; 14 per cent of 5 to 10 year old<br />

Londoners use the bus to <strong>travel</strong> to and from school compared with 45 per cent of<br />

11 to 15 year olds [12].<br />

The next most common form of transport to and from school is the car (as a<br />

passenger). Travell<strong>in</strong>g by car is more common for younger children (28 per cent of<br />

5 to 10 year old Londoners compared with 14 per cent of 11 to 15 year olds) [12].<br />

Ma<strong>in</strong> types of <strong>travel</strong> to school (2013/14) [12]<br />

% 5-15 5-10 11-15<br />

Base (2,371) (1,417) (954)<br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g 44 54 31<br />

Bus 27 14 45<br />

Car (as a passenger) 22 28 14<br />

Tube 1 - 2<br />

National Rail/Overground 1 - 1<br />

Cycl<strong>in</strong>g 1 1 2<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

The average length of a j<strong>our</strong>ney to school <strong>in</strong>creases from 1.6 miles among 5 to 10<br />

year olds to 3.7 miles among 11 to 16 year olds [54].<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 174


Younger People<br />

Average length of j<strong>our</strong>ney to/from school for Londoners (2013) [54]<br />

Miles 5-10 11-16<br />

Average length of trip 1.6 3.7<br />

Ticket types<br />

Younger Londoners have a variety of ticket options available to them:<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

Under five years old – <strong>travel</strong> free with a pay<strong>in</strong>g adult<br />

Five to 10 year olds – <strong>travel</strong> free with a pay<strong>in</strong>g adult or free with a 5-10 Zip<br />

Oyster photocard. Fares are applied on most National Rail services. However, a<br />

5-10 Oyster photocard can be obta<strong>in</strong>ed that enables a discounted child rate<br />

which is cheaper than pay<strong>in</strong>g cash<br />

Eleven to 15 year olds – free <strong>travel</strong> on buses and trams and pay child fares on<br />

the Tube, DLR, Overground and some National Rail services with an 11-15 Zip<br />

Oyster photocard. Eleven to 15 year olds can also <strong>travel</strong> free on Tube, DLR and<br />

London Overground services at any time as long as they are accompanied by<br />

an adult us<strong>in</strong>g a valid Visitor Oyster card or Travelcard ticket<br />

Children aged 5-15 pay child rate fares on the Emirates Air L<strong>in</strong>e<br />

Sixteen to 18 year olds who live <strong>in</strong> a London borough can <strong>travel</strong> free on buses<br />

and trams, and also use pay as you go at half the adult rate on all other TfL<br />

services (subject to specific age and full-time education status criteria)<br />

Students aged 18 years old and over receive a reduction of 30 per cent aga<strong>in</strong>st<br />

adult rate Travelcards, bus and tram passes<br />

Apprentices receive a reduction of 30 per cent aga<strong>in</strong>st adult rate Travelcards,<br />

bus and tram passes<br />

The proportion of 16 to 24 year olds with an Oyster card is 75 per cent – higher<br />

than all Londoners (60 per cent of all Londoners have an Oyster card). Young<br />

people under 16 are considerably less likely to have an Oyster card (30 per cent of<br />

11 to 15 year olds have one), reflect<strong>in</strong>g the greater opportunities for free or<br />

reduced <strong>travel</strong> for this age group [12].<br />

Londoners aged 16-24 are more likely than all Londoners to use an Oyster pay as<br />

you go card (67 per cent compared with 58 per cent) [32].<br />

Tickets and passes used on public transport (January 2015) [32]<br />

% All 16-24<br />

Base: Public transport users: (975) (110)<br />

Oyster PAYG 58 67<br />

Oyster Season ticket 20 26<br />

Contactless payment 16 15<br />

Cash/s<strong>in</strong>gle/return 10 7<br />

Any other Travelcard 7 5<br />

Freedom Pass 21 2<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 175


Younger People<br />

Possession of an Oyster card (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All<br />

Aged 24 &<br />

under<br />

5-10 11-15 16-24<br />

Base (15,700) (4,220) (1,417) (954) (1,849)<br />

Have an Oyster card 60 44 1 30 75<br />

Do not have an Oyster card 40 56 99 70 25<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Note that Oyster card ownership excludes Freedom Passes, Oyster photocards and Zip cards.<br />

Possession of passes/cards entitl<strong>in</strong>g the holder to free or reduced <strong>travel</strong> is higher<br />

among under 25 year olds than all Londoners; it is particularly elevated for 11 to 15<br />

year olds with 83 per cent <strong>in</strong> possession of a free bus <strong>travel</strong> pass [12].<br />

This data reflects possession, rather than use of passes/cards for free or reduced<br />

<strong>travel</strong>.<br />

Possession of pass/card entitl<strong>in</strong>g free <strong>travel</strong>/reduced fares (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All<br />

Aged 24 &<br />

under<br />

5-10 11-15 16-24<br />

Base (15,700) (4,220) (1,417) (954) (1,849)<br />

Free bus <strong>travel</strong> pass 9 32 7 83 25<br />

Free Tube/rail <strong>travel</strong> pass 1 2 2 2 1<br />

Reduced bus <strong>travel</strong> pass 3 6 - 2 11<br />

Reduced Tube/rail <strong>travel</strong><br />

pass<br />

9 21 2 32 28<br />

*Note that LTDS data excludes children aged under five.<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 176


Younger People<br />

Barriers<br />

Barriers to greater public transport use<br />

For younger Londoners aged between 16 and 24 years old the issue that they most<br />

commonly say prevents them from us<strong>in</strong>g public transport more often is<br />

overcrowded services. This is also the most commonly mentioned barrier for all<br />

Londoners (65 per cent of 16 to 24 year old Londoners compared with 59 per cent<br />

all Londoners) [14].<br />

Follow<strong>in</strong>g overcrowded services, the second most mentioned issue is slow j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

times. Fifty per cent of younger Londoners say that slow j<strong>our</strong>ney times stop them<br />

from us<strong>in</strong>g public transport more often, compared with 41 per cent of all<br />

Londoners. Other areas where a greater proportion of younger Londoners report<br />

barriers than all Londoners are:<br />

Unreliable services (46 per cent of 16 to 24 year olds compared with 37 per<br />

cent of all Londoners)<br />

Dirty environment on the bus/tra<strong>in</strong> (37 per cent compared with 28 per cent)<br />

Dirty environment gett<strong>in</strong>g to the bus/tra<strong>in</strong> (24 per cent compared with 18<br />

per cent)<br />

Risk of accidents (14 per cent compared with 9 per cent) [14].<br />

Barriers to us<strong>in</strong>g public transport more often (prompted) (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]<br />

% All 16-24<br />

Base (4,005) (299)<br />

Overcrowded services 59 65<br />

Cost of tickets 45 49<br />

Slow j<strong>our</strong>ney times 41 50<br />

Concern about antisocial behavi<strong>our</strong> 34 28<br />

Unreliable services 37 46<br />

Dirty environment on the bus/tra<strong>in</strong> 28 37<br />

Fear of crime gett<strong>in</strong>g to/ wait<strong>in</strong>g for the<br />

bus/tra<strong>in</strong><br />

24 28<br />

Fear of crime on the bus/tra<strong>in</strong> 23 24<br />

Fear about knife crime 20 23<br />

Dirty environment gett<strong>in</strong>g to the bus/tra<strong>in</strong> 18 24<br />

Fear of terrorist attacks 12 16<br />

Graffiti 10 9<br />

Lack of <strong>in</strong>formation on how to use public<br />

transport<br />

10 8<br />

Risk of accidents 9 14<br />

Don’t understand how to buy bus tickets 5 5<br />

None of these 17 9<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 177


Younger People<br />

Safety and security<br />

We use a typology of worry to monitor the perceptions of Londoners with regard<br />

to their personal security while us<strong>in</strong>g public transport <strong>in</strong> London. The typology<br />

classifies people <strong>in</strong>to:<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

Unworried – reports no general worry and no episodes of recent worry<br />

Unexpressed fear – reports no general worry, but specific recent episodes<br />

Anxious – reports general worry, but no specific recent episodes<br />

Worried – reports general worry, and specific recent episodes<br />

Don’t know<br />

The majority of Londoners fall <strong>in</strong>to the ‘unworried’ category which means that<br />

they are generally unworried about their personal security <strong>in</strong> London, and have<br />

experienced no <strong>in</strong>cidents that made them feel worried <strong>in</strong> the last three months.<br />

The proportion of younger Londoners (16-24) who are ‘unworried’ is <strong>in</strong> l<strong>in</strong>e with<br />

the average across all Londoners (73 per cent of 16 to 24 year olds compared with<br />

75 per cent all Londoners) [14].<br />

Typology of worry (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]<br />

% All 16-24<br />

Base (4,005) (299)<br />

Unworried 75 73<br />

Unexpressed 11 14<br />

Anxious 6 5<br />

Worried 6 6<br />

Don’t know 2 2<br />

A similar pattern is observed for each typology of worry with younger Londoners<br />

(16-24) <strong>in</strong> l<strong>in</strong>e with all Londoners [14].<br />

We observed very little difference between the levels of concern about personal<br />

security when us<strong>in</strong>g public transport <strong>in</strong> London between those aged 16-24 and all<br />

Londoners [14].<br />

Levels of concern about personal security when us<strong>in</strong>g public transport <strong>in</strong> London (Jan/<br />

Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]<br />

% All 16-24<br />

Base (4,005) (299)<br />

Not at all worried 42 45<br />

A little bit worried 45 43<br />

Quite a bit worried 9 9<br />

Very worried 3 2<br />

Don’t know 1 2<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 178


Younger People<br />

A similar proportion of younger Londoners and all Londoners take precautions<br />

aga<strong>in</strong>st crime when us<strong>in</strong>g public transport (36 per cent aged 16-24 compared with<br />

38 per cent all Londoners). [14]<br />

The most common precaution for both younger and all Londoners is to sit by other<br />

people (47 per cent of 16 to 24 year olds compared with 34 per cent of all<br />

Londoners). Younger Londoners are more likely to say that they <strong>travel</strong> with<br />

someone else as a precaution aga<strong>in</strong>st crime (43 per cent of 16 to 24 year olds<br />

compared with 23 per cent of all Londoners), that they use a different route to<br />

<strong>travel</strong> (28 per cent of 16 to 24 year olds compared with 15 per cent of all<br />

Londoners) and that they avoid us<strong>in</strong>g specific types of transport (20 per cent of 16<br />

to 24 year olds compared with 12 per cent of all Londoners). Younger Londoners<br />

are also less likely than all Londoners to say that they look after their belong<strong>in</strong>gs<br />

(17 per cent aged of 16 to 24 year olds compared with 29 per cent of all Londoners)<br />

or stay aware and vigilant when <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g (f<strong>our</strong> per cent of 16 to 24 year olds<br />

compared with 15 per cent of all Londoners) [14].<br />

Precautions taken (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]<br />

% All 16-24<br />

Base (all who take precautions) (1,507) (110)<br />

Sat near to other people 34 47<br />

Look after my belong<strong>in</strong>gs 29 17<br />

Travelled with someone else 23 43<br />

Travel at a different time of day 16 23<br />

Used a different route 15 28<br />

Stay aware/vigilant 15 4<br />

Avoided us<strong>in</strong>g that transport type 12 20<br />

Only take necessities with me 3 2<br />

Carry a personal alarm 3 -<br />

Note responses 2% or below among all Londoners not shown.<br />

In terms of actual experiences, the proportion of younger Londoners who have felt<br />

worried about their personal security when us<strong>in</strong>g public transport <strong>in</strong> the past three<br />

months is higher than the average across all Londoners (20 per cent of 16 to 24<br />

year olds compared with 17 per cent all Londoners). Younger Londoners who have<br />

experienced a worry<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>cident <strong>in</strong> the three months prior to be<strong>in</strong>g surveyed were<br />

much more likely to have experienced this dur<strong>in</strong>g night-time (71 per cent of the<br />

most recent episodes of worry were experienced <strong>in</strong> the night-time compared with<br />

58 per cent among all Londoners who have experienced a worry<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>cident) [14].<br />

Those who have felt worried about their personal security when us<strong>in</strong>g public<br />

transport <strong>in</strong> the last three months were asked on which type of transport they<br />

experienced this event. Younger Londoners are more likely than all Londoners to<br />

have experienced the last worry<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>cident on a bus (65 per cent of those aged<br />

16-24 experienc<strong>in</strong>g a worry event compared with 48 per cent all Londoners) [14].<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 179


Younger People<br />

Crime and antisocial behavi<strong>our</strong> concerns affect frequency of <strong>travel</strong> on the Tube, bus or<br />

National Rail ‘a little’ or ‘a lot’ for slightly more than half of Londoners (53 per cent). The<br />

frequency of public transport use be<strong>in</strong>g affected ‘a little’ or ‘a lot’ among 16 to 24 year olds<br />

is higher, with 65 per cent say<strong>in</strong>g that their frequency of use is affected a little or a lot [14].<br />

Proportion of Londoners for whom concerns over crime/antisocial behavi<strong>our</strong> affect the<br />

frequency of their public transport use ‘a lot/a little’ (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]<br />

% All 16-24<br />

Base (4,005) (299)<br />

Overall: Dur<strong>in</strong>g the day/after dark<br />

Underground/buses/National Rail 53 65<br />

Dur<strong>in</strong>g the day:<br />

Underground/buses/National Rail 22 30<br />

Underground 16 22<br />

Buses 17 25<br />

National Rail 11 16<br />

After dark:<br />

Underground/buses/National Rail 49 62<br />

Underground 37 46<br />

Buses 42 55<br />

National Rail 29 31<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 180


Younger People<br />

The use of illegal (unbooked) m<strong>in</strong>icabs<br />

We have run the Safer Travel at Night (STaN) campaign s<strong>in</strong>ce 2003, aim<strong>in</strong>g to<br />

reduce the use of illegal (unbooked) m<strong>in</strong>icabs. We target <strong>our</strong> communication<br />

campaigns <strong>in</strong> this area particularly at young women aged between 16 and 34 [36].<br />

We conduct research every year to monitor the use of unbooked m<strong>in</strong>icabs among<br />

<strong>our</strong> target audience and we also evaluate the communications campaign to<br />

determ<strong>in</strong>e its effectiveness.<br />

One per cent of those aged 16-24 used an illegal (unbooked) m<strong>in</strong>icab to reach their<br />

onward dest<strong>in</strong>ation on the night that we <strong>in</strong>terviewed them. This is the same<br />

proportion as all of those we <strong>in</strong>terviewed 7 [36].<br />

The future likelihood of us<strong>in</strong>g an unbooked m<strong>in</strong>icab stands at 19 per cent for 16 to<br />

24 year olds [36].<br />

The use of illegal (unbooked) m<strong>in</strong>icabs (2015) [36]<br />

% All 16-34<br />

Use of illegal m<strong>in</strong>icabs<br />

Base (651) (554)<br />

Used an illegal m<strong>in</strong>icab to reach onward<br />

dest<strong>in</strong>ation on night of <strong>in</strong>terview<br />

1 1<br />

Likely to use illegal m<strong>in</strong>icab <strong>in</strong> future 19 19<br />

Unlikely to use illegal m<strong>in</strong>icab <strong>in</strong> future 80 79<br />

We have <strong>in</strong>cluded more <strong>in</strong>formation on STaN <strong>in</strong> the chapter on women.<br />

Road traffic <strong>in</strong>juries<br />

Despite a spike <strong>in</strong> the number of children reported killed or seriously <strong>in</strong>jured <strong>in</strong><br />

London <strong>in</strong> 2012, the most up-to-date figures show a return to the decl<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g trend<br />

(from 331 <strong>in</strong> 2007 to 187 <strong>in</strong> 2013) [18].<br />

Number of reported killed or seriously <strong>in</strong>jured child road casualties <strong>in</strong> London over time<br />

[18]<br />

Number 0-15 16-24<br />

2007 331 696<br />

2008 310 665<br />

2009 263 598<br />

2010 250 515<br />

2011 230 510<br />

2012 270 496<br />

2013 187 385<br />

7 The sample for this study comprises people recruited <strong>in</strong> the queues of popular London late night venues, and<br />

is therefore not necessarily reflective of the London population as a whole.<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 181


Younger People<br />

We have run a number of successful Teen Road Safety campaigns where recall and<br />

awareness of <strong>our</strong> communications is high. However, the campaigns appear to<br />

have more impact on knowledge than behavi<strong>our</strong> [61]. Eighty-eight per cent of 11<br />

to 15 year olds recognise that ‘It’s important to stop and th<strong>in</strong>k before cross<strong>in</strong>g the<br />

road’, and yet there are some residual attitudes among younger Londoners which<br />

reveal a potentially unsafe approach to road safety. Forty-f<strong>our</strong> per cent agree they<br />

take no notice of road safety, 40 per cent say that they cross the road anywhere<br />

rather than go<strong>in</strong>g out of their way to use a cross<strong>in</strong>g and 37 per cent run across the<br />

road [62].<br />

This is confirmed <strong>in</strong> other research which suggests that young people can often be<br />

distracted by their friends and their belong<strong>in</strong>gs (such as phones and headphones)<br />

when cross<strong>in</strong>g the road [61].<br />

The proportion of those aged 11-15 who agree that they are always/usually careful<br />

when cross<strong>in</strong>g the road with friends stands at 73 per cent. However, 36 per cent<br />

say they always/usually look at their phones while cross<strong>in</strong>g the road [62].<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 182


Younger People<br />

Chang<strong>in</strong>g behavi<strong>our</strong>s<br />

We have run several campaigns to enc<strong>our</strong>age safer <strong>travel</strong> behavi<strong>our</strong>s, conduct<strong>in</strong>g<br />

research while we developed of these communications. Our research showed us<br />

that to enc<strong>our</strong>age safer behavi<strong>our</strong> among younger people when cross<strong>in</strong>g roads,<br />

any communications campaigns that we create need an emotional motivator<br />

alongside a directional rem<strong>in</strong>der. Friendship is considered to be a strong<br />

emotional motivator. Our directional rem<strong>in</strong>ders focus on road safety lessons from<br />

childhood (for example, Stop, Look, Listen, Th<strong>in</strong>k.) [61].<br />

In 2014, we trialled ‘Children’s Traffic Club’ (CTC), a new <strong>in</strong>itiative to improve<br />

awareness and understand<strong>in</strong>g of road safety among younger children. CTC<br />

<strong>in</strong>cluded a series of DVDs and <strong>in</strong>teractive exercises. Engagement was high, with<br />

94 per cent of parents who were sent the books us<strong>in</strong>g at least one of the materials<br />

and 75 per cent us<strong>in</strong>g all the materials. At least 70 per cent of parents found these<br />

materials easy to use or <strong>in</strong>terest<strong>in</strong>g for their children [64].<br />

CTC had a positive impact on children’s attitudes and behavi<strong>our</strong>. Eighty-seven per<br />

cent of parents agreed that their child seemed ‘more aware of road safety and<br />

potential dangers’ as a result of CTC. Furthermore, the majority of parents noticed<br />

an improvement <strong>in</strong> their child’s actual behavi<strong>our</strong> when cross<strong>in</strong>g roads. Over 70 per<br />

cent of parents agreed that their child stopped at the kerb to look and listen more,<br />

waited until the safe to cross light went green at pelican cross<strong>in</strong>gs before cross<strong>in</strong>g<br />

or pressed the button for the green light more often. Sixty-eight per cent reported<br />

that their child stopped walk<strong>in</strong>g or runn<strong>in</strong>g near roads more when they were told<br />

to [64].<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 183


Younger People<br />

Customer satisfaction<br />

Overall satisfaction<br />

We measure overall satisfaction with various transport types <strong>in</strong> London on an 11-<br />

po<strong>in</strong>t scale, with 10 represent<strong>in</strong>g extremely satisfied and zero represent<strong>in</strong>g<br />

extremely dissatisfied. We then scale this up to 100).<br />

We have standardised satisfaction rat<strong>in</strong>gs which we have laid out <strong>in</strong> the table<br />

below. This allows us to apply consistent analysis across a wide range of<br />

satisfaction research.<br />

Average rat<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Level of satisfaction<br />

Under 50<br />

Very low/weak/poor<br />

50-54 Low/weak/poor<br />

55-64 Fairly/relatively/quite low/weak/poor<br />

65-69 Fair/reasonable<br />

70-79 Fairly/relatively/quite good<br />

80-84 Good or fairly high<br />

85-90 Very good or high<br />

90+ Excellent or very high<br />

We do not collect customer satisfaction data from people aged under 16.<br />

There is very little difference between the satisfaction levels of younger people<br />

and those of all Londoners.<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 184


Younger People<br />

Overall satisfaction with transport types (2014/15) [16]<br />

Satisfaction score (0-100) All 16-24 16-19 20-24<br />

Bus services<br />

Base (14,155) (2,802) (1,501) (1,301)<br />

Satisfaction score 85 84 84 84<br />

Bus stations<br />

Base (3,626) (935) (388) (547)<br />

Satisfaction score 78 78 79 78<br />

Night bus<br />

Base (910) (266) (76) (190)<br />

Satisfaction score 81 80 80 80<br />

Underground<br />

Base (17,634) (3,657) (904) (2,753)<br />

Satisfaction score 84 85 85 85<br />

Overground<br />

Base (5,397) (1,216) (290) (926)<br />

Satisfaction score 83 83 84 83<br />

DLR<br />

Base (13,398) (3,231) (790) (2,441)<br />

Satisfaction score 89 88 88 88<br />

Trams<br />

Base (4,329) (709) (400) (309)<br />

Satisfaction score 89 88 88 88<br />

Victoria Coach Station<br />

Base (1,204) (448) (129) (319)<br />

Satisfaction score 82 81 84 81<br />

London River Services<br />

Base (2,106) (192) (35*) (157)<br />

Satisfaction score 90 89 - 89<br />

* Denotes small base size (percentages not shown <strong>in</strong> this report for base sizes of less than 50).<br />

Satisfaction is not shown for Dial-a-Ride, black cabs, m<strong>in</strong>icabs and Woolwich Ferry due to small base sizes.<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 185


Score out of 100<br />

Younger People<br />

Bus<br />

Satisfaction among bus users is good/fairly high at 85 out of 100. Satisfaction<br />

among younger customers aged 16-24 is <strong>in</strong> l<strong>in</strong>e with customers overall (84 out of<br />

100 among 16 to 24 year olds compared with 85 out of 100 of all customers) [16].<br />

Satisfaction with safety and security at the bus stop/shelter and safety and<br />

security on board buses is also the same between younger and all customers (86<br />

out of 100 for both younger and all customers for safety and security at bus<br />

stop/shelter, and 89 out of 100 for both younger and all customers for safety and<br />

security on board the bus) [16].<br />

Overall satisfaction with buses has <strong>in</strong>creased over time for younger customers –<br />

from 73 out of 100 <strong>in</strong> 2002/03 to 84 <strong>in</strong> 2014/15. This is <strong>in</strong> l<strong>in</strong>e with trends seen<br />

among all customers [16].<br />

Overall satisfaction with buses over time [16]<br />

100<br />

90<br />

80<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

76 77 78 78 77 79 80 79 80 80 82 83 85<br />

73 74 75 74 75 78 77 78 78 78 81 81 84<br />

All customers<br />

16 to 24 year old customers<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 186


Score out of 100<br />

Younger People<br />

Younger customers’ satisfaction with the value for money of bus services is also <strong>in</strong><br />

l<strong>in</strong>e with the average for all customers (70 out of 100 among 16 to 24 year olds<br />

compared with 72 out of 100 all customers) [16].<br />

Satisfaction with value for money with buses over time [16]<br />

100<br />

90<br />

80<br />

70<br />

60<br />

78 77<br />

75 73<br />

72 72 71<br />

68<br />

66 66<br />

74 74 73<br />

72 71 72<br />

69<br />

67<br />

66 68<br />

65 66<br />

71 72<br />

70 70<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

Drivers of satisfaction<br />

All customers<br />

16 to 24 year old customers<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>neys, j<strong>our</strong>ney time and comfort <strong>in</strong>side the bus are key factors<br />

for younger people <strong>in</strong> terms of bus customer satisfaction scores. Satisfaction<br />

among 16 to 19 year olds is also driven by safety and security at stops and shelters,<br />

while for slightly older customers (20 to 24 year olds), <strong>in</strong>terior <strong>in</strong>formation is a<br />

driver of satisfaction [16].<br />

Drivers of satisfaction for bus users [16]<br />

All customers 16-19 20-24<br />

J<strong>our</strong>ney time Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney J<strong>our</strong>ney time<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney Comfort <strong>in</strong>side the bus Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Comfort <strong>in</strong>side the bus<br />

Safety and security at stops<br />

and shelters<br />

Interior <strong>in</strong>formation<br />

Satisfaction with <strong>in</strong>fo on delays<br />

at stop<br />

Time waited to catch bus<br />

J<strong>our</strong>ney time<br />

Time waited to catch bus<br />

Comfort <strong>in</strong>side the bus<br />

Driver approachability and<br />

helpfulness<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 187


Score out of 100<br />

Younger People<br />

Tube<br />

Satisfaction with the Tube among younger customers (16 to 24 year olds) is<br />

almost the same as for all customers, (85 out of 100 compared with 84 out of 100<br />

all customers) [16].<br />

Satisfaction with safety and security <strong>in</strong> the station scores fairly highly at 86 out of<br />

100 for both young people and all customers, and safety on the tra<strong>in</strong> also scores<br />

highly (88 out of 100 for young people and 87 out of 100 for all customers) [16].<br />

Overall, satisfaction with the Tube has risen considerably among younger<br />

customers and all customers <strong>in</strong> recent years. Among 16 to 24 year olds,<br />

satisfaction has risen from 74 out of 100 <strong>in</strong> 2002/03 to 85 out of 100 <strong>in</strong> 2014/15 [16].<br />

Overall satisfaction with the Tube over time [16]<br />

100<br />

90<br />

80<br />

70<br />

60<br />

75 76 78 78 76 77<br />

74 76 77 77 76 77<br />

79 79 79 80<br />

79 80 78 80<br />

83 83 85<br />

83 82<br />

84<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

All customers<br />

16 to 24 year old customers<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 188


Score out of 100<br />

Younger People<br />

Satisfaction with value for money of the Tube is lower than overall satisfaction.<br />

Customers aged 16-24 give the Tube a score of 67 out of 100, which is slightly<br />

lower than the score given by all customers of 69 out of 100 [16].<br />

Satisfaction with value for money with the Tube over time [16]<br />

100<br />

90<br />

80<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

63 64 62 62 61 63<br />

60 61 59 58 58<br />

61<br />

65 67<br />

63<br />

67<br />

65<br />

62<br />

62<br />

60<br />

66 67<br />

64 64<br />

69<br />

67<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

Drivers of satisfaction<br />

All customers<br />

16 to 24 year old customers<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>neys, comfort and length of j<strong>our</strong>ney are the three ma<strong>in</strong> drivers<br />

of customer satisfaction among younger Tube users. These factors are also the<br />

top three drivers of all Tube customer satisfaction [16].<br />

Drivers of satisfaction for Tube users [16]<br />

All customers 16-19 20-24<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Length of j<strong>our</strong>ney time Comfort of j<strong>our</strong>ney Length of j<strong>our</strong>ney time<br />

Comfort of j<strong>our</strong>ney Length of j<strong>our</strong>ney time Comfort of j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Length of time wait<strong>in</strong>g for tra<strong>in</strong> Tra<strong>in</strong> driver announcements Personal safety on tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Personal safety on tra<strong>in</strong> Helpfulness of PA Smoothness of j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 189


Younger People<br />

Overground<br />

Overall satisfaction with the Overground is good/fairly high among younger<br />

customers at 83 out 100. This is the same score given by all customers [16].<br />

Overall satisfaction with London Overground over time – all customers [16]<br />

Satisfaction score All 16-24 16-19 20-24<br />

(0-100)<br />

Base 2014/15 (5,397) (1,216) (290) (926)<br />

2009/10 73 74 76 73<br />

2010/11 80 79 79 80<br />

2011/12 82 81 80 81<br />

2012/13 82 82 80 82<br />

2013/14 82 81 80 81<br />

2014/15 83 83 84 83<br />

As seen <strong>in</strong> <strong>our</strong> research results for the Tube and buses, value for money<br />

satisfaction scores for the Overground are lower than the overall satisfaction<br />

score. Younger customers rate overall satisfaction with value for money with the<br />

Overground at 72 out of 100, and this is <strong>in</strong> l<strong>in</strong>e with all customers who rate value<br />

for money at 73 out of 100. There has been little change <strong>in</strong> people’s perception of<br />

value for money over the past three years, except among 16 to 19 year olds, whose<br />

level of satisfaction has risen by 10 po<strong>in</strong>ts from 67 to 77 out of 100 [16].<br />

Satisfaction with value for money with London Overground over time – all customers [16]<br />

Satisfaction score All 16-24 16-19 20-24<br />

(0-100)<br />

Base 2014/15 (5,182) (1,180) (287) (893)<br />

2011/12 72 70 67 70<br />

2012/13 71 70 68 70<br />

2013/14 70 68 71 67<br />

2014/15 73 72 77 71<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 190


Younger People<br />

Drivers of satisfaction<br />

Customer satisfaction among younger Overground users is driven by similar<br />

factors to all customers. However, younger users tend to be more focused on<br />

<strong>in</strong>formation at stations than all customers [16].<br />

Drivers of satisfaction for Overground users [16]<br />

All customers Aged 16-24<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Condition and state of repair of the tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Feel valued as a customer<br />

Comfort of the tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Information about service disruption on the<br />

tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Condition and state of repair of the tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Information about service disruptions at the<br />

station<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Comfort while wait<strong>in</strong>g for the tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Information about service disruption on the<br />

tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Docklands Light Railway (DLR)<br />

Overall satisfaction with the DLR is rated ‘fairly high’ among younger customers at<br />

88 out of 100. This is <strong>in</strong> l<strong>in</strong>e with the average given by all customers (89 out 100).<br />

The last three years have seen much higher satisfaction with the DLR amongst<br />

both younger and all customers [16].<br />

Overall satisfaction with DLR over time – all customers [16]<br />

Satisfaction score All 16-24 16-19 20-24<br />

(0-100)<br />

Base 2014/15 (13,398) (3,231) (790) (2,441)<br />

2009/10 81 80 79 80<br />

2010/11 81 81 78 82<br />

2011/12 82 82 82 82<br />

2012/13 87 87 86 87<br />

2013/14 87 87 86 87<br />

2014/15 89 88 88 88<br />

Value for money satisfaction with the DLR among younger customers is <strong>in</strong> l<strong>in</strong>e<br />

with customers overall (77 out of 100 for both 16 to 24 year old customers and all<br />

customers). Satisfaction with value for money amongst younger customers<br />

returns to a higher level after a drop <strong>in</strong> 2013/14 [16].<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 191


Younger People<br />

Satisfaction with value for money with DLR over time – all customers [16]<br />

Satisfaction score All 16-24 16-19 20-24<br />

(0-100)<br />

Base 2014/15 (12,839) (3,103) (756) (2,347)<br />

2011/12 72 70 71 70<br />

2012/13 74 71 72 71<br />

2013/14 75 73 75 72<br />

2014/15 77 77 79 76<br />

Drivers of satisfaction<br />

The key drivers of satisfaction for the DLR are very similar for young people (16-<br />

24) and DLR customers, namely ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>neys, reliability of the service,<br />

length of the j<strong>our</strong>ney time and feel<strong>in</strong>g valued as a customer [16].<br />

Drivers of satisfaction for DLR users [16]<br />

All customers 16-24<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Comfort of the tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Length of j<strong>our</strong>ney time<br />

Reliability of tra<strong>in</strong>s<br />

Feel valued as a customer<br />

Ease of mak<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

Reliability of tra<strong>in</strong>s<br />

Length of j<strong>our</strong>ney time<br />

Feel valued as a customer<br />

Length of time waited for the tra<strong>in</strong><br />

Transport for London – Younger People 192


Younger People<br />

Trams<br />

Overall satisfaction with London’s trams is high among customers at 89 out of<br />

100. This is very similar among younger users (88 out of 100). Satisfaction<br />

amongst younger customers has been catch<strong>in</strong>g up with all customer satisfaction,<br />

hav<strong>in</strong>g been slightly lower over the past few years [16].<br />

Overall satisfaction with trams over time – all customers [16]<br />

Satisfaction score All 16-24 16-19 20-24<br />

(0-100)<br />

Base 2014/15 (4,329) (709) (400) (309)<br />

2009/10 86 83 83 84<br />

2010/11 85 80 79 81<br />

2011/12 86 81 81 80<br />

2012/13 89 86 85 88<br />

2013/14 89 86 85 88<br />

2014/15 89 88 88 88<br />

Overall satisfaction with value for money on tram services is quite good (78 out of<br />

100 for all customers and 81 out of 100 for 16 to 24 year olds). Those <strong>in</strong> their teens<br />

are generally more satisfied with value for money of trams than those <strong>in</strong> their early<br />

twenties [16].<br />

Satisfaction with value for money with trams over time – all customers [16]<br />

Satisfaction score All 16-24 16-19 20-24<br />

(0-100)<br />

Base 2014/15 (2,824) (1,801) (1,175) (487)<br />

2011/12 73 75 81 66<br />

2012/13 77 77 82 70<br />

2013/14 78 79 86 72<br />

2014/15 78 81 86 75<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 193


Younger People<br />

Streets<br />

Three quarters (76 per cent) of the younger Londoners we asked about their last<br />

walk<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney <strong>in</strong> London were satisfied with the streets and pavements; the<br />

figure amongst all Londoners is 68 per cent. However, the difference between<br />

these data po<strong>in</strong>ts is not statistically significant due to the limited sample size of<br />

younger Londoners <strong>in</strong> the survey [34].<br />

Overall satisfaction with streets and pavement after last j<strong>our</strong>ney over time – walk<strong>in</strong>g<br />

j<strong>our</strong>ney [34]<br />

Net fairly satisfied/very<br />

All 16-24<br />

satisfied (%)<br />

Base 2014/15 (957) (57)<br />

2011 64 75<br />

2012 68 79<br />

2013 69 77<br />

2014 68 86<br />

2015 68 76<br />

There is <strong>in</strong>sufficient sample to detail satisfaction results with car j<strong>our</strong>ney and cycl<strong>in</strong>g.<br />

Transport for London Road Network (TRLN)<br />

Satisfaction with the TRLN is reasonable to fairly good. Younger users of the<br />

TLRN give a score of 70 out of 100 for walk<strong>in</strong>g, 72 out of 100 for <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g by bus<br />

on red routes and 67 out of 100 for driv<strong>in</strong>g. Results are similar for younger and all<br />

Londoners [16].<br />

Overall satisfaction – general impression of red routes over time 2014/15 [16]<br />

Satisfaction score (0-100) All 16-24<br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Base 2014-15 (1,254) (125)<br />

2013/14 70 72<br />

2014/15 68 70<br />

Travell<strong>in</strong>g by bus<br />

Base 2014-15 (4,620) (483)<br />

2013/14 69 *<br />

2014/15 71 72<br />

Driv<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Base 2014-15 (3,605) (169)<br />

2013/14 67 *<br />

2014/15 67 67<br />

Cycl<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Base 2014-15 (1,838) (211)<br />

2013/14 69 *<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 194


Younger People<br />

2014/15 70 72<br />

* Denotes small base size (data is not shown <strong>in</strong> this report for base sizes of less than 50).<br />

Access to <strong>in</strong>formation<br />

Access to the <strong>in</strong>ternet<br />

Younger Londoners aged 16-24 are significantly more likely to access the <strong>in</strong>ternet<br />

than all Londoners (99 per cent of 16 to 24 year olds access the <strong>in</strong>ternet compared<br />

with 92 per cent of all Londoners). N<strong>in</strong>ety-six per cent of younger Londoners<br />

access the <strong>in</strong>ternet at home, 76 per cent ‘on the move’ and 49 per cent at work.<br />

Internet access on the move is considerably higher among younger Londoners<br />

than Londoners overall [15].<br />

Internet access (Apr/ Oct 2014) [15]<br />

% All Londoners 16-24<br />

Base (2,001) (139)<br />

Any access 92 99<br />

Access at home 89 96<br />

Access ‘on the move’ 61 76<br />

Access at work 56 49<br />

The reasons why younger Londoners use the <strong>in</strong>ternet are broadly <strong>in</strong> l<strong>in</strong>e with all<br />

London <strong>in</strong>ternet users, but there are some notable differences.<br />

The largest difference <strong>in</strong> percentage po<strong>in</strong>ts between younger Londoners and all<br />

Londoners <strong>in</strong> terms of <strong>in</strong>ternet use is for:<br />

Play<strong>in</strong>g games (59 per cent of 16 to 24 year olds do this compared with 36 per<br />

cent of all Londoners, a 23 po<strong>in</strong>t difference)<br />

Social media and network<strong>in</strong>g (91 per cent compared with 70 per cent)<br />

Watch<strong>in</strong>g video content (81 per cent compared with 63 per cent)<br />

Apps for mobile devices (81 per cent compared with 63 per cent) [15].<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 195


Younger People<br />

Reasons for us<strong>in</strong>g the <strong>in</strong>ternet (Apr/ Oct 2014) [15]<br />

% All 16-24<br />

Base (1,679) (138)<br />

Email 94 92<br />

Social media and network<strong>in</strong>g 70 91<br />

F<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>formation 89 86<br />

Watch<strong>in</strong>g video content 63 81<br />

Apps for mobile devices 63 81<br />

Maps and directions 84 80<br />

Access<strong>in</strong>g live public transport <strong>in</strong>formation 78 77<br />

Buy<strong>in</strong>g goods/services 79 73<br />

Education related 64 73<br />

Shar<strong>in</strong>g photos 58 68<br />

Mak<strong>in</strong>g day-to-day <strong>travel</strong> plans 67 59<br />

Play<strong>in</strong>g games 36 59<br />

Bank<strong>in</strong>g 68 58<br />

Work-related 65 51<br />

Contact<strong>in</strong>g companies for customer service 53 37<br />

Device usage and behavi<strong>our</strong><br />

N<strong>in</strong>ety-six per cent of 16 to 24 year olds use a smartphone, which is a significantly<br />

higher proportion than Londoners overall (77 per cent) [15].<br />

Proportion of Londoners who use a smartphone (iPhone, BlackBerry, other) (Apr/ Oct<br />

2014) [15]<br />

% Base Smartphone ownership<br />

All Londoners (2,001) 77<br />

16 to 24 year old Londoners (139) 96<br />

16 to 24 year old white<br />

Londoners<br />

16 to 24 year old BAME<br />

Londoners<br />

(70) 94<br />

(64) 100<br />

Fifty-five per cent of Londoners aged 16-24 use an iPhone and 37 per cent use an<br />

Android phone [15].<br />

A key reason that those from younger age groups use these devices is to stay connected to<br />

their friends. Thirty-eight per cent of 8 to 17 year olds use devices ‘so they know what<br />

others are do<strong>in</strong>g,’ and 30 per cent use sites for ‘fear of miss<strong>in</strong>g out.’[71]<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 196


Younger People<br />

Us<strong>in</strong>g the TfL website<br />

Younger Londoners (aged 16-24) are more likely than all Londoners to use the TfL<br />

website, with 83 per cent do<strong>in</strong>g so compared with 78 per cent of all Londoners<br />

[15].<br />

Younger users of the TfL website are more likely to visit the site on a frequent<br />

basis than all users. Among the 16-24 age group, 21 per cent visit www.tfl.gov.uk<br />

on a daily basis compared with ten per cent of all users [15].<br />

Proportion of Londoners who use www.tfl.gov.uk (Apr/ Oct 2014) [15]<br />

% All 16-24<br />

Base (2,001) (139)<br />

Use the TfL website 78 83<br />

Daily 10 21<br />

Up to 3-4 times a week 21 20<br />

Up to 3-4 times a month 20 20<br />

About once a month 17 12<br />

Less than once a month 11 10<br />

Never 20 15<br />

Don’t know/ refused 2 2<br />

Higher proportions of users aged 16-24 (compared to all other users) visit the TfL<br />

website to use J<strong>our</strong>ney Planner (77 per cent compared with 68 per cent), to f<strong>in</strong>d<br />

out about live <strong>travel</strong> <strong>in</strong>formation (35 per cent compared with 30 per cent) and to<br />

f<strong>in</strong>d out about planned works or closures (29 per cent compared with 24 per cent)<br />

[37].<br />

Ma<strong>in</strong> purpose of today’s visit to the TfL website (2013) [37]<br />

% All 16-24<br />

Base (28,278) (3,460)<br />

Us<strong>in</strong>g J<strong>our</strong>ney Planner to plan a route 68 77<br />

F<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g out live <strong>travel</strong> <strong>in</strong>formation 30 35<br />

F<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g out about planned works or closures 24 29<br />

Do<strong>in</strong>g someth<strong>in</strong>g related to Oyster cards or<br />

other tickets<br />

20 25<br />

F<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g a map 15 16<br />

Do<strong>in</strong>g someth<strong>in</strong>g related to Congestion Charge 4 5<br />

F<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g out about cycl<strong>in</strong>g 3 3<br />

F<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g out about roads or driv<strong>in</strong>g 2 2<br />

Other 4 5<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 197


Younger People<br />

Access<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>formation <strong>in</strong> the event of <strong>travel</strong> disruption<br />

Younger Londoners are more likely to seek real-time <strong>travel</strong> <strong>in</strong>formation than all<br />

Londoners (87 per cent compared with 82 per cent). Although they use them<br />

more, they look for similar <strong>in</strong>formation s<strong>our</strong>ces as all Londoners. The most<br />

commonly used s<strong>our</strong>ce of <strong>travel</strong> <strong>in</strong>formation by 16 to 24 year olds is the TfL<br />

website (used by 53 per cent compared with 43 per cent of all Londoners), along<br />

with non-TfL apps which are used by 30 per cent of 16 to 24 year olds and 19 per<br />

cent of all Londoners. Staff, announcements or displays at stations are not so<br />

popular among younger Londoners <strong>in</strong> comparison to all Londoners (47 per cent of<br />

16 to 24 year olds compared with 54 per cent of all Londoners) [15].<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 198


Younger People<br />

Work<strong>in</strong>g together<br />

Understand<strong>in</strong>g young Londoners’ <strong>travel</strong> needs through youth <strong>in</strong>volvement<br />

Our Schools and Young Person Delivery Plan sets out <strong>our</strong> commitment to engage with<br />

young people and the organisations represent<strong>in</strong>g them, to communicate and develop <strong>our</strong><br />

programmes.<br />

We engage with more than 30 organisations that work with children and young people<br />

across the Capital. In 2009 we <strong>in</strong>troduced a Youth Panel to <strong>in</strong>clude a group of young<br />

Londoners aged between 13 and 25 <strong>in</strong> <strong>our</strong> policy-mak<strong>in</strong>g process.<br />

The Youth Panel runs an annual Youth Participation Day for young people from stakeholder<br />

organisations and we <strong>in</strong>vite them to have their say on TfL’s programmes for young people.<br />

Through <strong>in</strong>teractive workshops, the participants explore the <strong>travel</strong> needs of young<br />

Londoners and share their views directly with TfL staff.<br />

The Youth Participation Day <strong>in</strong> November 2013 highlighted the need to cont<strong>in</strong>ue to<br />

enc<strong>our</strong>age young people to stay safe and act responsibly on London’s roads. It also raised<br />

the importance of <strong>travel</strong> to young Londoners’ <strong>in</strong>dependence, particularly for young<br />

disabled people. This has <strong>in</strong>formed the priorities of the Youth Panel’s 2014 term. The panel<br />

is <strong>in</strong>form<strong>in</strong>g the development of TfL’s Teen Road Safety campaign and meet<strong>in</strong>g with youth<br />

representatives from accessibility stakeholders.<br />

Transport for London – Younger People 199


Disabled People<br />

Summary: Disabled People<br />

Key f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

F<strong>our</strong>teen per cent of Londoners consider themselves to have a disability that impacts<br />

their day to day activities ‘a lot’ or ‘a little’ [2]<br />

N<strong>in</strong>ety per cent of disabled Londoners report that their disability limits their ability to<br />

<strong>travel</strong> [12]<br />

Disabled Londoners <strong>travel</strong> less often than non-disabled Londoners (1.9 compared with<br />

2.8 trips on an average weekday) [12]<br />

The most commonly used types of transport by disabled Londoners are walk<strong>in</strong>g (78 per<br />

cent of disabled Londoners walk at least once a week), the bus (56 per cent) and car as<br />

the passenger (47 per cent) [12]<br />

The ma<strong>in</strong> barriers that disabled Londoners experience and which have an impact upon<br />

their ability to make public transport j<strong>our</strong>neys as often as they would like are often the<br />

same as those expressed by non-disabled Londoners, namely overcrowd<strong>in</strong>g and<br />

concerns about the antisocial behavi<strong>our</strong> of other customers. Disabled customers also<br />

see accessibility-related issues, cost and comfort as barriers to <strong>travel</strong> [14, 65]<br />

Freedom Passes are the most common ticket type used on TfL services by disabled<br />

Londoners (66 per cent). Twenty-seven per cent of disabled Londoners use Oyster pay<br />

as you go (PAYG), a considerably smaller figure than non-disabled Londoners where<br />

Oyster PAYG is used by 61 per cent [32]<br />

Internet use is lower among disabled Londoners (76 per cent compared with 93 per<br />

cent of non-disabled Londoners) and disabled people are also less likely to use the TfL<br />

website (54 per cent for disabled Londoners compared with 81 per cent for nondisabled<br />

Londoners) [15]<br />

Disabled Londoners are less likely to own a smartphone than non-disabled Londoners<br />

(44 per cent compared with 80 per cent) [15]<br />

Note:<br />

Throughout this report, data relat<strong>in</strong>g to disabled people are based on survey and Census<br />

results where respondents have self-def<strong>in</strong>ed based on standard questions.<br />

Transport for London – Disabled People 200


Disabled People<br />

Profile of disabled Londoners<br />

There are several s<strong>our</strong>ces which aim to quantify the number of disabled people <strong>in</strong><br />

London. The primary benchmark s<strong>our</strong>ce is the 2011 Census, conducted by the<br />

Office for National Statistics. Accord<strong>in</strong>g to the Census, 14 per cent of Londoners<br />

consider themselves to have a long-term health problem or disability that limits<br />

their day-to-day activities ‘a lot’ or ‘a little’, which has lasted, or is expected to last<br />

at least 12 months [2].<br />

TfL also undertakes measurement of the number of disabled people <strong>in</strong> London on<br />

an ongo<strong>in</strong>g basis as part of <strong>our</strong> London Travel Demand Survey. This survey uses<br />

slightly different questions (due to the different purpose of the research). Data<br />

from 2013/14 shows that 11 per cent of Londoners consider that they have a longterm<br />

physical or mental disability or health issue that limits their daily activities,<br />

the work they can do and their ability to <strong>travel</strong> (this <strong>in</strong>cludes issues experienced by<br />

older customers) [12].<br />

Fifty-eight per cent of disabled Londoners state that their disability affects their<br />

mobility, 21 per cent have a serious long-term illness and 11 per cent have a<br />

mental health condition [12]. It is important to note, however, that many disabled<br />

people experience multiple impairments.<br />

The profile of disabled Londoners identified <strong>in</strong> the LTDS varies from that of nondisabled<br />

people and Londoners overall.<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

Fifty-six per cent of disabled Londoners are women, compared to 50 per cent<br />

of non-disabled Londoners<br />

Forty-f<strong>our</strong> per cent of disabled Londoners are aged 65 or over compared to<br />

n<strong>in</strong>e per cent of non-disabled Londoners. This older age profile of disabled<br />

Londoners has an <strong>in</strong>fluence upon many of the f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>gs covered <strong>in</strong> this report<br />

Sixty-n<strong>in</strong>e per cent of disabled Londoners are white, compared to 61 per cent<br />

of non-disabled Londoners<br />

Eighty-three per cent of disabled Londoners are retired or not work<strong>in</strong>g<br />

compared with 24 per cent of non-disabled Londoners<br />

Forty-one per cent of disabled Londoners have household <strong>in</strong>come of less than<br />

£10,000 compared with 15 per cent of non-disabled Londoners [12]<br />

Transport for London – Disabled People 201


Disabled People<br />

Transport behavi<strong>our</strong><br />

Disabled Londoners <strong>travel</strong> less frequently than non-disabled Londoners (1.9<br />

j<strong>our</strong>neys per weekday compared with 2.8 for non-disabled Londoners). While the<br />

ma<strong>in</strong> transport types used by disabled Londoners are the same as those used by<br />

non-disabled Londoners (namely walk<strong>in</strong>g, bus, and car both as a driver and a<br />

passenger), lower proportions of disabled people use each type of transport at<br />

least once a week than non-disabled Londoners (with the exception of the car as a<br />

passenger where the same proportion of disabled and non-disabled Londoners<br />

<strong>travel</strong> this way at least once a week) [12].<br />

Disabled Londoners are more likely to walk (78 per cent) and use buses (56 per<br />

cent) at least once a week than other types of transport [12]<br />

Lower proportions of disabled Londoners <strong>travel</strong> by Tube (16 per cent) and<br />

National Rail (eight per cent). The proportion is considerably lower than for<br />

non-disabled Londoners (41 per cent and 18 per cent respectively) [12]<br />

Disabled Londoners are most likely to use public transport for the purposes of<br />

shopp<strong>in</strong>g, personal bus<strong>in</strong>ess and leisure (these trips make up 73 per cent of<br />

j<strong>our</strong>neys by disabled Londoners, compared with 45 per cent for non-disabled<br />

Londoners)<br />

Members of Dial-a-Ride tend to be older than the average disabled Londoner –<br />

81 per cent of Dial-a-Ride members are aged 65 and over, compared to 41 per<br />

cent of all disabled Londoners [30, AB]<br />

Disabled Londoners are more likely to hold an older person’s Freedom Pass (43 per<br />

cent compared with 12 per cent of non-disabled Londoners) and less likely than<br />

non-disabled Londoners to hold an Oyster card (23 per cent compared with 64 per<br />

cent of non-disabled Londoners). Seventeen per cent of disabled people hold a<br />

disabled person’s Freedom Pass [12].<br />

Barriers<br />

We conducted a survey <strong>in</strong> 2014 to further understand some of the key issues faced<br />

by disabled people <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g on the network. The results show that the majority of<br />

disabled Londoners (61 per cent) would <strong>travel</strong> more often than they currently do if<br />

they did not experience barriers such as accessibility or cost constra<strong>in</strong>ts [65].<br />

Additional j<strong>our</strong>neys that would be made more often without these barriers would<br />

be for leisure and social activities such as visit<strong>in</strong>g friends and family (49 per cent),<br />

enterta<strong>in</strong>ment and exercise (41 per cent), social activities such as go<strong>in</strong>g to the pub<br />

or to a restaurant (40 per cent) and shopp<strong>in</strong>g (34 per cent) [65].<br />

The ma<strong>in</strong> issues that affect the ability of disabled Londoners to make public<br />

transport j<strong>our</strong>neys as often as they would like can be summarised as:<br />

Accessibility related (44 per cent)<br />

Cost (21 per cent)<br />

Comfort – <strong>in</strong>corporat<strong>in</strong>g issues such as overcrowd<strong>in</strong>g, unsuitable or unavailable<br />

seat<strong>in</strong>g (20 per cent)<br />

Availability and reliability (16 per cent) [65]<br />

Transport for London – Disabled People 202


Disabled People<br />

Disabled and non-disabled Londoners alike recognise that TfL has made<br />

improvements to the accessibility of public transport, and 43 per cent of disabled<br />

people th<strong>in</strong>k that <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> London has become more accessible over the past<br />

year [65].<br />

We use a typology of worry to monitor the perceptions of Londoners with regard<br />

to their personal security while us<strong>in</strong>g public transport <strong>in</strong> London. The majority of<br />

Londoners fall <strong>in</strong>to the ‘unworried’ category which means that they are generally<br />

unworried about their personal security <strong>in</strong> London, and have experienced no<br />

<strong>in</strong>cidents that made them feel worried <strong>in</strong> the last three months. A lower<br />

proportion of disabled Londoners consider themselves to be ‘unworried’ than nondisabled<br />

Londoners (68 per cent compared with 76 per cent) [14].<br />

In terms of general worry, the disabled people we surveyed felt slightly more<br />

worried than non-disabled people about their personal security when us<strong>in</strong>g public<br />

transport <strong>in</strong> London <strong>in</strong> the past three months (15 per cent compared with 11 per<br />

cent). Furthermore, among disabled Londoners who have experienced worry,<br />

more disabled people report experienc<strong>in</strong>g such events on a regular basis – 29 per<br />

cent say that they experienced a worry<strong>in</strong>g event five times or more <strong>in</strong> the past<br />

three months, compared with 17 per cent of non-disabled people who have<br />

experienced worry<strong>in</strong>g events with this frequency [14].<br />

Customer satisfaction<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

Disabled Londoners’ satisfaction with public transport tends to be <strong>in</strong> l<strong>in</strong>e with<br />

the satisfaction of all Londoners. Disabled and non-disabled bus users are very<br />

satisfied overall (85 out of 100) [16]<br />

Tube satisfaction is also high among disabled users (84 out of 100 compared<br />

with 84 out of 100 for non-disabled Londoners) [16]<br />

Satisfaction with value for money is often higher among disabled Londoners<br />

than non-disabled Londoners [16]. This may be l<strong>in</strong>ked to the higher proportion<br />

of disabled Londoners hav<strong>in</strong>g access to a Freedom Pass [12]<br />

Disabled Londoners are less satisfied with the streets and pavements on their<br />

last walk<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney compared with non-disabled Londoners (51 per cent<br />

compared with 71 per cent) [34]<br />

Transport for London – Disabled People 203


Disabled People<br />

Access to <strong>in</strong>formation<br />

A significantly lower proportion of disabled Londoners access the <strong>in</strong>ternet<br />

compared with non-disabled Londoners (76 per cent compared with 93 per cent).<br />

This is true for all age groups, although not to the same extent. Older disabled<br />

Londoners are considerably less likely to access the <strong>in</strong>ternet than younger disabled<br />

Londoners (53% of disabled Londoners aged 65 years old or over access the<br />

<strong>in</strong>ternet compared with 90% of disabled Londoners aged 16 to 64) [15].<br />

Among disabled Londoners, 54 per cent use the TfL website. This compares to 81<br />

per cent of non-disabled Londoners [15].<br />

Disabled customers use maps and timetables widely, referr<strong>in</strong>g to them both at<br />

home and on the j<strong>our</strong>ney, and us<strong>in</strong>g the ‘disabled sign’ as a quick reference to<br />

confirm whether or not the station will be accessible [66]. Our research <strong>in</strong>dicates<br />

that disabled customers have a higher reliance on paper-based s<strong>our</strong>ces than nondisabled<br />

customers. However, this may be due to the older profile of disabled<br />

customers than non-disabled customers [48].<br />

Disabled customers have concerns about disruptions that non-disabled customers<br />

experience too; however, disruptions can have a greater impact upon disabled<br />

customers because they can face greater difficulties overcom<strong>in</strong>g their effects.<br />

Disabled customers report that they can experience anxiety dur<strong>in</strong>g disruptions and<br />

that access to reliable, live <strong>in</strong>formation is crucial to m<strong>in</strong>imise this [66].<br />

Transport for London – Disabled People 204


Disabled People<br />

Introduction<br />

Many disabled people and those with a long-term health conditions face a number<br />

of barriers to <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g. While many issues are the same for disabled and nondisabled<br />

Londoners, some barriers relate specifically to the physical <strong>in</strong>frastructure<br />

of public transport, as well as less tangible issues such as reduced confidence <strong>in</strong><br />

<strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>dependently [47].<br />

The Mayor’s Transport Strategy (MTS) sets out the Mayor’s transport vision over<br />

the next 20 years and describes how TfL and its partners will deliver this vision. TfL<br />

is committed to deliver<strong>in</strong>g transport services that are accessible to all Londoners<br />

and we cont<strong>in</strong>ue to <strong>in</strong>vest <strong>in</strong> improv<strong>in</strong>g transport accessibility for disabled people<br />

who live <strong>in</strong>, work <strong>in</strong>, or visit London.<br />

To support the MTS, the TfL Bus<strong>in</strong>ess Plan for the next decade <strong>in</strong>cludes activities<br />

for <strong>in</strong>frastructure improvements to make <strong>in</strong>formation and advice clearer and<br />

simpler, improvements to staff tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g, and further engagement with disabled<br />

customers [67]. A major part of this <strong>in</strong>vestment <strong>in</strong>cludes mak<strong>in</strong>g a third of<br />

London’s Tube stations fully accessible with step-free access to platforms and<br />

tra<strong>in</strong>s by 2021 and better signage. Both <strong>our</strong> S<strong>in</strong>gle Equality Scheme 2012–2015<br />

and <strong>our</strong> ‘Y<strong>our</strong> Accessible Transport Network’ document highlight detailed activity<br />

to address and mitigate many of the issues over the com<strong>in</strong>g years that <strong>our</strong><br />

research has uncovered [69, 70].<br />

Throughout this chapter, we show data for disabled Londoners <strong>in</strong> comparison to<br />

data for non-disabled Londoners and all Londoners. All TfL surveys use the<br />

Equality Act 2010 to def<strong>in</strong>e a disabled person as someone who def<strong>in</strong>es themselves<br />

as hav<strong>in</strong>g a long-term physical or mental disability or health issue that impacts on<br />

their daily activities, the work they can do, or limits their ability to <strong>travel</strong>. This<br />

differs slightly to the Census, where the question asked is: ‘Are y<strong>our</strong> day-to-day<br />

activities limited because of a health problem or disability which has lasted, or is<br />

expected to last, at least 12 months?’ [2].<br />

Please note that the differences highlighted between disabled and non-disabled<br />

people <strong>in</strong> this chapter may be <strong>in</strong>fluenced by a number of factors other than<br />

disability, with age, <strong>in</strong>come and education all affect<strong>in</strong>g perceptions towards <strong>travel</strong><br />

<strong>in</strong> London and <strong>travel</strong> behavi<strong>our</strong>.<br />

It is also important to be aware that disability is not homogeneous and the effects<br />

of hav<strong>in</strong>g a physical impairment, mental health condition or experienc<strong>in</strong>g other<br />

barriers relat<strong>in</strong>g to the use of public transport are therefore <strong>diverse</strong>.<br />

Transport for London – Disabled People 205


Disabled People<br />

As part of <strong>our</strong> work to understand the needs and op<strong>in</strong>ions of disabled customers,<br />

we conduct a range of research programmes, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g an accessibility mystery<br />

<strong>travel</strong>ler survey (AMTS). AMTS works with disabled people to assess objectively<br />

and monitor the whole j<strong>our</strong>ney experience of <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g around London. It<br />

produces <strong>in</strong>sights which help us to monitor and ga<strong>in</strong> a deeper understand<strong>in</strong>g of<br />

the experiences of disabled people, enabl<strong>in</strong>g us to take action, plan improvements<br />

and ultimately improve accessibility. We have <strong>in</strong>cluded data from this research<br />

<strong>in</strong>to this chapter where appropriate.<br />

Profile of disabled Londoners<br />

There are several s<strong>our</strong>ces which aim to quantify the number of disabled people <strong>in</strong><br />

London. The primary benchmark s<strong>our</strong>ce is the 2011 Census, conducted by the<br />

Office for National Statistics. Accord<strong>in</strong>g to the Census, 14 per cent of Londoners<br />

consider themselves to have a long-term health problem or disability that limits<br />

their day-to-day activities, which has lasted, or is expected to last, at least 12<br />

months (7 per cent consider this affects their activity ‘a lot’ and 7 per cent ‘a little’).<br />

This is the lowest proportion recorded for any region of the UK, possibly due to the<br />

lower average age of Londoners compared to those liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> other regions [2].<br />

We also monitor the number of disabled people <strong>in</strong> London on an ongo<strong>in</strong>g basis as<br />

part of <strong>our</strong> London Travel Demand Survey. This survey uses a slightly different set<br />

of questions (due to the different purpose of the research). Data from 2013/14<br />

shows that 11 per cent of Londoners (circa 833,000 exclud<strong>in</strong>g those aged under<br />

five) consider that they have a long-term physical or mental disability or health<br />

issue that limits their daily activities, the work they can do (<strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g issues due to<br />

old age) or their ability to <strong>travel</strong> [12].<br />

Slightly less than two per cent of Londoners (16 per cent of disabled Londoners)<br />

are wheelchair users (circa 133,000 exclud<strong>in</strong>g those aged under five years old) [12].<br />

Transport for London – Disabled People 206


Disabled People<br />

Many disabled people have multiple impairments. The most frequently reported<br />

impairments faced by disabled Londoners are related to mobility (58 per cent)<br />

[12].<br />

LTDS profile of disabled people <strong>in</strong> London (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All Londoners All disabled Londoners<br />

Base (15,700) (1,821)<br />

Disabled 11 -<br />

Non-disabled 89 -<br />

Disability affects <strong>travel</strong> 10 90<br />

Ever use a wheelchair 2 16<br />

Mobility impairment 6 58<br />

Serious long-term illness 2 21<br />

Mental health condition 1 11<br />

Visual impairment 1 6<br />

Hear<strong>in</strong>g impairment 1 5<br />

Learn<strong>in</strong>g disability 1 7<br />

Other 1 14<br />

Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Note that the table above refers to the impairments experienced by Londoners who<br />

consider themselves to have a long-term physical or mental disability or health issue that<br />

limits their daily activities, the work they can do (<strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g issues due to old age) or their<br />

ability to <strong>travel</strong>, and that there may be more people with the above impairments that do<br />

not consider them to affect their activities.<br />

The proportion of Londoners who are disabled <strong>in</strong>creases with age. F<strong>our</strong> per cent of<br />

16 to 24 year old Londoners are disabled compared with 37 per cent of Londoners<br />

aged 65 or over. Age is an important factor beh<strong>in</strong>d other demographic differences<br />

observed. For example, disabled Londoners are more likely to be women and less<br />

likely to be BAME Londoners. However, both of these trends appear to be related<br />

primarily to the age profile of disabled Londoners [12].<br />

Transport for London – Disabled People 207


Disabled People<br />

LTDS demographic profile of disabled people <strong>in</strong> London (2013/14) [12]<br />

% Proportion of<br />

disabled Londoners<br />

Proportion of<br />

category who are<br />

disabled<br />

Proportion of nondisabled<br />

Londoners<br />

Base (1,821) (varies) (13,879)<br />

Gender<br />

Men 44 10 50<br />

Women 56 12 50<br />

Age<br />

5-15 4 3 15<br />

16-24 5 4 15<br />

25-64 47 8 61<br />

65+ 44 37 9<br />

Ethnicity<br />

White 69 12 61<br />

BAME 30 9 38<br />

Household <strong>in</strong>come<br />

Less than £10,000 41 25 15<br />

£10,000–£19,999 28 16 18<br />

£20,000–£34,999 15 8 20<br />

£35,000–£49,999 6 5 14<br />

£50,000–£74,999 5 3 16<br />

£75,000+ 6 4 17<br />

Work<strong>in</strong>g status*<br />

Work<strong>in</strong>g full-time 8 2 52<br />

Work<strong>in</strong>g part-time 5 5 12<br />

Student 3 4 11<br />

Retired 48 38 11<br />

Not work<strong>in</strong>g 35 26 13<br />

*Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five and work<strong>in</strong>g status does not <strong>in</strong>clude under 16s.<br />

All TfL surveys use the Equality Act 2010 to def<strong>in</strong>e disabled people as those who def<strong>in</strong>e themselves as hav<strong>in</strong>g a long-term physical or mental<br />

disability or health issue that impacts on their daily activities, the work they can do, or limits their ability to <strong>travel</strong><br />

Transport for London – Disabled People 208


Disabled People<br />

How to read the table<br />

The table above shows:<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

The proportion of disabled Londoners who relate to each category – for<br />

example, 44 per cent of disabled Londoners are men<br />

The proportion of each category who are disabled – for example, ten per cent<br />

of men <strong>in</strong> London are disabled<br />

The proportion of non-disabled Londoners who relate to each category for<br />

comparison – for example, 50 per cent of non-disabled Londoners are men<br />

Gender<br />

Disabled Londoners are more likely to be women than men; among all disabled<br />

Londoners 56 per cent are women (compared to 50 per cent of the non-disabled<br />

population) [12].<br />

Gender profile of disabled people <strong>in</strong> London (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All disabled<br />

Londoners<br />

All non-disabled<br />

Londoners<br />

Gender (1,821) (13,879)<br />

Men 44 50<br />

Women 56 50<br />

Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Men and women are equally likely to be disabled until they reach around 50 years<br />

of age, after which women are more likely to be disabled than men at all ages [2].<br />

Proportion of Londoners by age and gender who are disabled [2]<br />

% Men Women<br />

Age<br />

0-15 4 3<br />

16-24 5 4<br />

25-34 5 5<br />

35-49 11 12<br />

50-64 22 25<br />

65-74 38 41<br />

75-84 57 63<br />

85+ 78 83<br />

This data is based o self-assessment of activity limitations.<br />

Base size not shown as data taken from the 2011 Census.<br />

Transport for London – Disabled People 209


Disabled People<br />

Ethnicity<br />

Disabled Londoners are more likely to be white than non-disabled Londoners (69<br />

per cent of disabled Londoners are white compared with 61 per cent of nondisabled<br />

Londoners) [12].<br />

Ethnicity profile of disabled Londoners (2013/14) [12]<br />

% All disabled<br />

Londoners<br />

65+ disabled<br />

Londoners<br />

All nondisabled<br />

Londoners<br />

65+ nondisabled<br />

Londoners<br />

Base (1,821) (922) (13,879) (1,553)<br />

Ethnicity<br />

White 69 80 61 82<br />

BAME 30 19 38 18<br />

Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

White Londoners are more likely than BAME Londoners to be disabled (12 per<br />

cent of white Londoners are disabled compared with n<strong>in</strong>e per cent of BAME<br />

Londoners). This appears to be related to the older age profile of white Londoners,<br />

as the difference <strong>in</strong> each specific age category is not significant [12].<br />

Proportion of white and BAME Londoners who are disabled (2013/14) [12]<br />

% White BAME<br />

All Londoners 12 9<br />

16-24 4 4<br />

65+ 37 39<br />

Base: All white Londoners (10,044), white 16 to 24 year old Londoners (1,049), white 65+ year old Londoners (2,004), all BAME<br />

Londoners (5,563), BAME 16 to 24 year old Londoners (792), BAME 65+ year old Londoners (464).<br />

Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Transport for London – Disabled People 210


Disabled People<br />

Employment and <strong>in</strong>come<br />

Disabled Londoners are more likely to live <strong>in</strong> a household with an annual <strong>in</strong>come of<br />

£20,000 or less than non-disabled Londoners (69 per cent of disabled Londoners<br />

compared with 32 per cent of non-disabled Londoners). This pattern is observed<br />

across all ages.<br />

The difference is particularly clear <strong>in</strong> the mid-age groups; 62 per cent of disabled<br />

Londoners who are aged 25 to 64 live <strong>in</strong> a low <strong>in</strong>come household compared with<br />

25 per cent of non-disabled Londoners of the same age. This is likely to be related<br />

to the considerably lower proportion of disabled 25 to 64 year olds <strong>in</strong> full or parttime<br />

employment (23 per cent compared with 79 per cent among non-disabled 25<br />

to 64 year olds) [12].<br />

Proportion of each age group liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> households with an <strong>in</strong>come of less than £20,000<br />

(2013/14) [12]<br />

%<br />

Disabled<br />

Londoners<br />

Non-disabled<br />

Londoners<br />

Age<br />

All 69 32<br />

16-24 60 39<br />

25-64 62 25<br />

65+ 77 57<br />

Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Proportion of each age group work<strong>in</strong>g full or part-time (2013/14) [12]<br />

% Disabled<br />

Londoners<br />

Non-disabled<br />

Londoners<br />

Age<br />

16-24 3 33<br />

25-64 23 79<br />

65+ 3 16<br />

Base: Disabled 16 to 24 year old Londoners (63), disabled 25 to 64 year old Londoners (769), disabled 65+year old Londoners<br />

(922), non-disabled 16 to 24 year old Londoners (1,786), non-disabled 25 to 64 year-old Londoners (8,236), non-disabled 65+<br />

year old Londoners (1,553).<br />

Note that work<strong>in</strong>g status data excludes under 16s.<br />

Transport for London – Disabled People 211


Disabled People<br />

London boroughs<br />

The London boroughs with the highest proportion of disabled residents are:<br />

Highest proportion of disabled residents <strong>in</strong> London boroughs [2]<br />

Borough<br />

% of disabled residents<br />

Haver<strong>in</strong>g 17<br />

Bark<strong>in</strong>g and Dagenham 16<br />

Bexley 16<br />

Isl<strong>in</strong>gton 16<br />

Base size not shown as data taken from the ONS 2011 Census.<br />

The London boroughs with the lowest proportion of disabled residents are:<br />

Lowest proportion of disabled residents <strong>in</strong> London boroughs [2]<br />

Borough<br />

% of disabled residents<br />

Wandsworth 11<br />

Richmond upon Thames 11<br />

City of London 11<br />

Kens<strong>in</strong>gton and Chelsea 12<br />

K<strong>in</strong>gston upon Thames 12<br />

Merton 13<br />

Base size not shown as data taken from ONS 2011 Census.<br />

Transport for London – Disabled People 212


Disabled People<br />

Travel behavi<strong>our</strong><br />

The London transport network is one of the busiest <strong>in</strong> the world and on an average<br />

weekday more than 1.3 million trips are made by disabled <strong>travel</strong>lers [68]. The<br />

average number of trips made per weekday by <strong>in</strong>dividual disabled Londoners is<br />

1.9; this is below the average of 2.8 for non-disabled Londoners [12].<br />

Transport types used<br />

Disabled Londoners use a wide variety of transport to get around the Capital. The<br />

most common types of transport used are walk<strong>in</strong>g (78 per cent at least once a<br />

week), bus (56 per cent), car as a passenger (47 per cent) and car as a driver (26 per<br />

cent). These are also the ma<strong>in</strong> types of transport used by non-disabled Londoners<br />

but <strong>in</strong> different proportions [12].<br />

Disabled Londoners are considerably less likely than non-disabled Londoners to<br />

use the Tube at least once a week; 16% of disabled Londoners do so compared<br />

with 41% of non-disabled Londoners [12].<br />

Disabled Londoners use transport less frequently than non-disabled Londoners.<br />

For each type of transport (with the exception of private hire vehicles) a lower<br />

proportion of disabled Londoners use each type of transport at least once a week<br />

compared with non-disabled Londoners [12].<br />

Public transport generally is less commonly used by disabled Londoners than nondisabled<br />

Londoners; 59 per cent of disabled Londoners have used any public<br />

transport (exclud<strong>in</strong>g walk<strong>in</strong>g) <strong>in</strong> the last year compared with 73 per cent of nondisabled<br />

Londoners [12].<br />

Transport for London – Disabled People 213


Disabled People<br />

Proportion of Londoners us<strong>in</strong>g types of transport at least once a week (2013/14) [12]<br />

%<br />

Disabled<br />

Disabled<br />

16-64<br />

Disabled<br />

65+<br />

Nondisabled<br />

(All)<br />

Nondisabled<br />

65+<br />

Base (1,821) (832) (922) (13,879) (1,553)<br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g 78 85 68 98 97<br />

Bus 56 62 48 62 70<br />

Car (as a passenger) 47 46 47 48 43<br />

Car (as a driver) 26 28 26 41 56<br />

Tube 16 22 10 41 31<br />

National Rail 8 11 5 18 15<br />

Overground 4 6 1 10 5<br />

Other taxi/m<strong>in</strong>icab (PHV) 8 9 7 6 4<br />

London taxi/black cab 4 3 6 5 2<br />

DLR 3 4 1 5 2<br />

Tram (Croydon Traml<strong>in</strong>k) 1 2 1 2 2<br />

Motorbike 1 1 - 1 -<br />

Net: Any public transport (bus,<br />

Tube, National Rail, DLR, London<br />

Overground, tram)<br />

Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

59 67 49 73 75<br />

Where more detailed <strong>in</strong>formation on <strong>in</strong>dividual types of transport is available, we<br />

have <strong>in</strong>cluded a sub-section below.<br />

Transport for London – Disabled People 214


Disabled People<br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g is the most frequently used type of transport for both disabled and nondisabled<br />

Londoners. Only 11 per cent of disabled Londoners say that they have not<br />

made a j<strong>our</strong>ney by walk<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the past year and three per cent say that they have<br />

never made a walk<strong>in</strong>g j<strong>our</strong>ney [12].<br />

Frequency of walk<strong>in</strong>g (2013/14) [12]<br />

% Disabled Wheelchair user Non-disabled<br />

Base (1,821) (317) (13,879)<br />

5 or more days a week 51 20 86<br />

3 or 4 days a week 12 8 5<br />

2 days a week 9 6 4<br />

1 day a week 6 7 3<br />

At least once a fortnight 2 1 1<br />

At least once a month 3 4 1<br />

At least once a year 4 5 0<br />

Not used <strong>in</strong> last 12 months 11 37 0<br />

Never used 3 12 0<br />

Net: Used <strong>in</strong> the last 12 months 87 51 100<br />

Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Seventy-eight per cent of disabled Londoners walk at least once a week compared<br />

to 98 per cent of non-disabled Londoners and 51 per cent walk five or more times a<br />

week compared with 86 per cent of non-disabled Londoners [12].<br />

Our annual Attitude to Walk<strong>in</strong>g study establishes frequency of walk<strong>in</strong>g for specific j<strong>our</strong>ney<br />

purposes. There are differences <strong>in</strong> walk<strong>in</strong>g behavi<strong>our</strong> between disabled and non-disabled<br />

Londoners, particularly noticeable for walk<strong>in</strong>g at least once a week to visit social places (35<br />

per cent of disabled Londoners compared with 56 per cent of non-disabled Londoners) and<br />

to get to work/school/college (23 per cent of disabled Londoners compared with 56 per cent<br />

of non-disabled Londoners) [19].<br />

Walk<strong>in</strong>g at least once a week by purpose of j<strong>our</strong>ney (2015) [19]<br />

% who walk at least once a week Disabled Non-disabled<br />

Base (199) (785)<br />

Walk…<br />

To complete small errands such as gett<strong>in</strong>g a<br />

73 88<br />

newspaper or post<strong>in</strong>g a letter<br />

As part of a longer j<strong>our</strong>ney 57 80<br />

To visit friends and relatives 42 50<br />

To visit pubs/restaurants/c<strong>in</strong>emas and other<br />

35 56<br />

social places<br />

To get to work/school/college 23 56<br />

To take a child to school 13 19<br />

Transport for London – Disabled People 215


Disabled People<br />

Among disabled Londoners who state that their <strong>travel</strong> is limited by be<strong>in</strong>g disabled, 64 per<br />

cent consider it either impossible to walk without help (17 per cent) or difficult but not<br />

impossible to do so (47 per cent) [12].<br />

Bus<br />

Buses are the most commonly used type of public transport (except walk<strong>in</strong>g) by<br />

both disabled and non-disabled Londoners. However, disabled Londoners are less<br />

likely to use buses than non-disabled Londoners (79 per cent of disabled<br />

Londoners have used the bus <strong>in</strong> the past year compared with 92 per cent of nondisabled<br />

Londoners) [12].<br />

Frequency of <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g by bus (2013/14) [12]<br />

% Disabled Wheelchair user Non-disabled<br />

Base (1,821) (317) (13,879)<br />

5 or more days a week 20 5 29<br />

3 or 4 days a week 14 11 12<br />

2 days a week 11 8 11<br />

1 day a week 10 5 10<br />

At least once a fortnight 4 1 6<br />

At least once a month 8 7 10<br />

At least once a year 12 15 14<br />

Not used <strong>in</strong> last 12 months 18 41 6<br />

Never used 3 8 2<br />

Net: Used <strong>in</strong> the last 12 months 79 51 92<br />

Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Transport for London – Disabled People 216


Disabled People<br />

The physical accessibility of buses is one of the ma<strong>in</strong> reasons why they are one of<br />

the transport types most commonly used by disabled Londoners. All of TfL’s<br />

buses, with the exception of heritage Routemasters, are low-floored [74], 75 per<br />

cent of bus stops are now accessible and 95 per cent are scheduled to have been<br />

made accessible by 2016 [22]. Our research also suggests that, due to the nature<br />

of the bus network and the shorter distances required to reach bus stops than tra<strong>in</strong><br />

or Tube stations, approximately 90 per cent of Londoners live with<strong>in</strong> 400 metres of<br />

a bus stop [74].<br />

Fifty-eight per cent of Londoners who report that their <strong>travel</strong> is limited because<br />

they are disabled consider it either impossible to use the bus without help (23 per<br />

cent) or difficult but not impossible to use the bus (35 per cent). Forty per cent say<br />

that it is not difficult to use the bus and three per cent don’t know or never use it<br />

[12].<br />

Wheelchair users experience greater difficulties, despite all buses be<strong>in</strong>g equipped<br />

with low floor<strong>in</strong>g and wheelchair ramps. Fifty-seven per cent of wheelchair users<br />

surveyed say that it is impossible to use the bus without help, and a further 25 per<br />

cent say that it is difficult but not impossible. Ten per cent of wheelchair users use<br />

the bus without difficulties, while seven per cent don’t know or never use it [12].<br />

Wheelchair priority areas on buses<br />

AMTS covers access to the wheelchair priority area (WPA) on buses. Dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>our</strong><br />

2014/15 study period, 96 per cent of wheelchair accessibility mystery <strong>travel</strong>lers<br />

were able to get on the first bus that arrived and 97 per cent were able to reach the<br />

WPA before the bus moved off.<br />

On 27 per cent of j<strong>our</strong>neys the assessors reported that the area was <strong>in</strong>itially<br />

blocked. Unfolded buggies were the ma<strong>in</strong> cause of the blockage, identified on 58<br />

per cent of these observations.<br />

In one <strong>in</strong> five cases (20 per cent) other passengers removed the blockage without<br />

any action be<strong>in</strong>g required. In half the cases (49 per cent) the driver <strong>in</strong>tervened<br />

either by talk<strong>in</strong>g directly to passengers or by <strong>in</strong>itiat<strong>in</strong>g an iBus announcement.<br />

Other j<strong>our</strong>neys were completed by the assessor ask<strong>in</strong>g for the space to be cleared<br />

themselves (17 per cent of the time) or as a result of other reasons, ma<strong>in</strong>ly<br />

<strong>in</strong>volv<strong>in</strong>g shar<strong>in</strong>g of the WPA.<br />

‘There was a pram <strong>in</strong> the wheelchair space and I had to share.’<br />

‘The passenger did not move their buggy but I managed to squeeze past it <strong>in</strong>to the<br />

wheelchair space.’<br />

‘The wheelchair space was large enough for the buggy to rema<strong>in</strong> where it was<br />

whilst I manoeuvred <strong>in</strong>.’ [83]<br />

We carried out research <strong>in</strong> 2012 to understand the key issues for buggy users,<br />

wheelchair users and bus drivers to reduce conflict <strong>in</strong> the WPA, and how a<br />

communications campaign could help. Our research showed that wheelchair users<br />

experience logistical and <strong>in</strong>terpersonal challenges around the space, with conflict<br />

Transport for London – Disabled People 217


Disabled People<br />

often be<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>direct before passengers get on the bus. Inconsistent and<br />

unpredictable experiences are a major s<strong>our</strong>ce of stress and tension.<br />

‘I cannot physically get on a bus where I live because it’s a busy shopp<strong>in</strong>g area full<br />

of buggies. What’s the po<strong>in</strong>t of a wheelchair ramp if we can never get on?’ [43]<br />

The conflict <strong>in</strong> the WPA on buses is part of the wider experience of <strong>travel</strong>l<strong>in</strong>g by<br />

bus for wheelchair users [43].<br />

The WPA is a key consideration for wheelchair users when decid<strong>in</strong>g to <strong>travel</strong> by<br />

bus:<br />

Does my wheelchair/scooter fit <strong>in</strong> the area?<br />

Is there a buggy/pram already <strong>in</strong> the area? [72]<br />

‘My experience tak<strong>in</strong>g the bus from Earls C<strong>our</strong>t to Hammersmith was similarly<br />

<strong>in</strong>furiat<strong>in</strong>g. The driver <strong>in</strong>itially refused me entry because there was a buggy on<br />

board. I pleaded with him, not only because I knew I could fit on board but because<br />

it was p<strong>our</strong><strong>in</strong>g with ra<strong>in</strong>.’ [72]<br />

Wheelchair users on the whole feel that TfL recognises their needs and concerns.<br />

An example of this is the campaign to <strong>in</strong>form drivers, wheelchair users and other<br />

passengers on wheelchair priority area rules, and how wheelchair users need to<br />

<strong>travel</strong> on buses [73].<br />

Transport for London – Disabled People 218


Disabled People<br />

Bus j<strong>our</strong>ney purpose<br />

One of the reasons why disabled Londoners <strong>travel</strong> by bus dur<strong>in</strong>g the day is to<br />

<strong>travel</strong> for work purposes (28 per cent). The proportion of disabled Londoners who<br />

do this is considerably lower than for non-disabled Londoners (57 per cent). Buses<br />

are used more by disabled people dur<strong>in</strong>g the day for shopp<strong>in</strong>g (22 per cent<br />

compared with n<strong>in</strong>e per cent for non-disabled people), to visit friends and relatives<br />

(13 per cent compared with eight per cent for non-disabled) and for personal<br />

bus<strong>in</strong>ess (14 per cent compared with six per cent for non-disabled). A similar<br />

pattern is seen at night, although the differences between disabled and nondisabled<br />

people at this time are smaller [28].<br />

Purpose of bus j<strong>our</strong>ney by disability and time of day (2014) [28]<br />

Dur<strong>in</strong>g the day<br />

At night<br />

Disabled Non-disabled Disabled Non-disabled<br />

% (3,341) (28,680) (673) (7,068)<br />

To/from or for work 28 57 37 53<br />

To/from school/education 5 7 6 3<br />

To/from shopp<strong>in</strong>g 22 9 3 1<br />

Visit<strong>in</strong>g friends/relatives 13 8 16 13<br />

Leisure 10 10 20 22<br />

Personal bus<strong>in</strong>ess 14 6 9 1<br />

Other purpose 6 3 10 5<br />

Transport for London – Disabled People 219


Disabled People<br />

Car<br />

While a considerably lower proportion of disabled Londoners have driven a car to<br />

get around London <strong>in</strong> the past year than non-disabled Londoners (30 per cent<br />

compared with 47 per cent), the proportion who have used a car as a passenger <strong>in</strong><br />

the last year is very similar (85 per cent compared with 87 per cent) [12].<br />

Frequency of car use (2013/14) [12]<br />

Car as driver<br />

% Disabled Wheelchair<br />

user<br />

Disabled<br />

Car as passenger<br />

Wheelchair<br />

user<br />

Nondisabled<br />

Nondisabled<br />

Base (1,821) (317) (13,879) (1,821) (317) (13,879)<br />

5 or more days a week 13 10 23 8 7 10<br />

3 or 4 days a week 6 5 7 11 12 9<br />

2 days a week 4 2 7 14 17 14<br />

1 day a week 3 1 4 15 17 15<br />

At least once a fortnight 1 0 1 7 5 7<br />

At least once a month 1 1 2 11 11 12<br />

At least once a year 2 2 3 20 17 20<br />

Not used <strong>in</strong> last 12 months 18 24 8 12 10 8<br />

Never used 52 54 44 3 3 5<br />

Net: Used <strong>in</strong> the last 12<br />

months<br />

Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

30 22 47 85 87 87<br />

Disabled Londoners aged 17 and over are less likely to hold any type of driv<strong>in</strong>g<br />

licence (<strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g a provisional licence) than non-disabled Londoners (42 per cent<br />

disabled Londoners aged 17 or over compared with 74 per cent non-disabled<br />

Londoners aged 17 or over). A similar pattern is observed among both younger<br />

and older disabled Londoners when compared to non-disabled Londoners of the<br />

same ages [12].<br />

Similarly, disabled Londoners are less likely to have household access to a car than<br />

non-disabled Londoners. Just over half (52 per cent) of disabled Londoners do not<br />

have household access to a car compared to 32 per cent of non-disabled<br />

Londoners [12].<br />

Proportion of Londoners <strong>in</strong> a household with access to a car (2013/14) [12]<br />

% Disabled Non-disabled<br />

Base (1,821) (13,879)<br />

0 cars 52 32<br />

1 car 38 46<br />

2+ cars 10 21<br />

Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Transport for London – Disabled People 220


Disabled People<br />

Tube<br />

Disabled Londoners are considerably less likely to have used the Tube <strong>in</strong> the last<br />

year than non-disabled Londoners (58 per cent compared with 89 per cent). The<br />

difference is especially noticeable for more frequent Tube use, where only three<br />

per cent of disabled Londoners use the Tube five or more days a week, compared<br />

with 17 per cent of non-disabled Londoners. Sixteen per cent of disabled<br />

Londoners use the Tube at least once a week compared with 41 per cent of nondisabled<br />

Londoners [12].<br />

Frequency of Tube use (2013/14) [12]<br />

% Disabled Wheelchair Non-disabled<br />

user<br />

Base (1,821) (317) (13,879)<br />

5 or more days a week 3 0 17<br />

3 or 4 days a week 3 1 7<br />

2 days a week 4 2 8<br />

1 day a week 6 2 10<br />

At least once a fortnight 6 3 8<br />

At least once a month 11 7 15<br />

At least once a year 24 13 25<br />

Not used <strong>in</strong> last 12 months 35 60 8<br />

Never used 7 12 3<br />

Net: Used <strong>in</strong> the last 12 months 58 28 89<br />

Note that LTDS data <strong>in</strong> this report excludes children aged under five.<br />

Transport for London – Disabled People 221


Disabled People<br />

Sixty-one per cent of Londoners who report their <strong>travel</strong> is limited because they are<br />

disabled consider it either impossible to use the Tube without help (25 per cent) or<br />

difficult but not impossible to use the Tube (36 per cent), while 28 per cent say it is<br />

not difficult to use the Tube and 10 per cent don’t know or never use it [12].<br />

Wheelchair users experience greater difficulties despite TfL’s <strong>in</strong>vestment <strong>in</strong><br />

mak<strong>in</strong>g more stations accessible as part of <strong>our</strong> Tube upgrade programme. Fiftyeight<br />

per cent of wheelchair users say that it is impossible to use the Tube without<br />

help, and a further 21 per cent say that it is difficult but not impossible. Five per<br />

cent of wheelchair users use the Tube without difficulties, while 17 per cent don’t<br />

know or never use the Tube [12].<br />

An <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g number of Tube stations are accessible, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g lifts, tactile<br />

platform edges and wide gates and we cont<strong>in</strong>ue <strong>our</strong> work to <strong>in</strong>crease accessibility<br />

across the network [68].<br />

An example of <strong>our</strong> ongo<strong>in</strong>g work <strong>in</strong> this area is the recent trial of blue light<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong><br />

the gap between the tra<strong>in</strong> and the platform at Baker Street. This light<strong>in</strong>g is<br />

designed to make the gap between the tra<strong>in</strong> and platform more noticeable,<br />

particularly for people with visual impairments. [97]<br />

However, there are still many stations without full step-free access, and we have<br />

planned improvements for a number of these over the next few years. By the end<br />

of 2015/16 f<strong>in</strong>ancial year, we expect almost a third of Tube stations to have either<br />

step-free access from the street to all platforms (72 stations) or to at least one<br />

platform (14 stations) [22].<br />

Lifts open up many stations to a significant number of disabled people, which of<br />

c<strong>our</strong>se creates a reliance on lifts be<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> service. Malfunction<strong>in</strong>g lifts can have a<br />

significant impact on disabled people and where they are out of service there is a<br />

need for us to communicate this clearly [76].<br />

Improvements have also been made to tra<strong>in</strong>s on several Underground l<strong>in</strong>es, so<br />

that shortly 40 per cent of the Tube network will be served by tra<strong>in</strong>s with a high<br />

standard of accessibility [22]. The new S class roll<strong>in</strong>g stock has recently been<br />

<strong>in</strong>troduced, with all Circle l<strong>in</strong>e services us<strong>in</strong>g this stock from 10 February 2014 and<br />

approximately 50% of the District L<strong>in</strong>e by early 2015 [76].<br />

We are also plann<strong>in</strong>g the <strong>in</strong>troduction of the Tube for London, most probably<br />

dur<strong>in</strong>g the 2020s. The new Tube will have improved accessibility, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g stepfree<br />

access from the platform and more space for wheelchair users [76].<br />