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

Transport for London 1

Travel in London: understanding our diverse communities
2015
A summary of existing research
Contents
How to use this document ........................................................................... 5
Setting the scene ........................................................................................ 7
Summary ................................................................................................... 13
Summary: Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) Londoners ................ 22
Summary: Women .................................................................................... 68
Summary: Older people ........................................................................... 114
Summary: Younger people ....................................................................... 156
Summary: Disabled People ..................................................................... 200
Summary: People on lower income ......................................................... 267
Summary: Lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) Londoners ............................ 308
Bibliography ............................................................................................ 317
Glossary .................................................................................................. 320
Appendix A: Equality groups in London boroughs ................................... 324
Transport for London 2

Confidentiality
Please note that the copyright in the attached report is owned by Transport for
London (TfL) and the provision of information under the Freedom of Information
Act does not give the recipient a right to reuse the information in a way that would
infringe copyright (for example, by publishing and issuing copies to the public).
Brief extracts of the material may be reproduced under the fair dealing provisions
of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 for the purposes of research for
non-commercial purposes, private study, criticism, review and news reporting.
Details of the arrangements for reusing the material owned by TfL for any other
purpose can be obtained by contacting enquire@tfl.gov.uk.
Transport for London 3

Preface
The Equality Act 2010 requires that TfL and other public bodies have due regard
for all of London’s communities when developing services.
In this document we set out in detail a collection of research that we have
undertaken or commissioned to identify the different barriers faced by London’s
communities when accessing transport. We also describe travel patterns, the
behaviour of different groups, and attitudes towards issues such as fares, personal
safety and security and satisfaction with the services we offer.
We intend for this to be a source document for TfL, to help staff to fulfil their
responsibilities to London’s diverse communities when designing and delivering
our services.
The document also provides information for stakeholders, including those from
different communities, to inform their engagement with TfL.
Transport for London 4

How to use this document
This document is a collection of research data focusing on travel in London among
equality groups.
The data that we have used comes from a number of sources, including qualitative
and quantitative research that TfL has commissioned, published third party
reports and external sources such as the 2011 Census and other information from
the Office for National Statistics (ONS). The London Travel Demand Survey
(LTDS) is our own survey of transport use among Londoners and we have used this
extensively throughout this report.
We have identified seven groups of Londoners who experience a variety of barriers
when accessing public transport:
1. Black, Asian and minority ethnic groups (referred to as BAME throughout)
2. Women
3. Older Londoners (aged 65 and over)
4. Younger Londoners (aged 24 and under)
5. Disabled Londoners
6. Londoners on lower incomes (with household income of less than £20,000 per
year)
7. Lesbian, gay and bisexual Londoners (referred to as LGB throughout) – We
recognise that there may be barriers to transport faced by some transgender
women and men, however TfL does not yet have sufficient data to provide a
detailed analysis
We have presented data from the perspective of the equality group in question.
Each chapter follows a similar structure. Here is a brief description of each section:
Profile – covers the demographic profile of each group
Transport behaviour – addresses modes of transport used; journey purpose
and tickets used
Barriers – looks at what prevents Londoners in equality groups from using
public transport more often. This section also covers issues related to safety
and security when travelling in London
Customer satisfaction – considers how satisfied users of each type of
transport are overall, perceptions of value for money and what drives
satisfaction levels
Access to information – addresses the information needs of each group,
access to the internet and internet behaviour, use of the TfL website and
smartphone use
We have used a numbering system to reference the sources of information in this
report, with the number cited in square brackets [x]. You can find the
corresponding number and information source in the bibliography at the end of
this report. This report uses a variety of data, including qualitative and
quantitative research commissioned by TfL, and published third party reports.
Transport for London 5

We have also included a glossary for unfamiliar terminology at the end of the
report.
You can find further data on borough comparisons in Appendix A.
You may also wish to refer to TfL’s Single Equality Scheme (SES) and SES Action
Plan, both of which you can find on the TfL website.
Transport for London 6

Setting the scene
Understanding the travel needs of London’s diverse ccommunities: a summary of
existing research
Context
The Mayor published his Transport Strategy (MTS) in 2010. The strategy describes
how we should develop London’s transport system if we are to deliver the best
possible service for all people living in, working in and visiting London [1].
Our Capital’s transport system should excel among world cities, providing access
and opportunities for all of its people and enterprises, achieving the highest
environmental standards and leading the world in tackling the urban transport
challenges of the 21st century [1].
The current MTS sets out the priorities for London over a 20 year period to 2030.
TfL publishes an Accessibility Implementation Plan alongside the MTS which
explains how and when we will carry out improvements, along with the expected
outcomes. We monitor this closely to ensure that TfL is delivering the best for our
diverse communities.
London: a growing city
London is growing rapidly, and at a rate faster than previously estimated. The
2011 Census showed that London had grown by one million people in 10 years [2].
The 2011 London Plan predicted that London would grow to a population of 8.6
million by 2026 [3], but the population is already approaching this number [4].
We now expect London’s population to reach 10 million by 2030 (2m people more
than in 2013) – equivalent to the populations of Manchester, Bristol and
Birmingham all moving to the capital [4].
London: a diverse, changing city
London is hugely diverse, and this diversity is increasing with the growing
population.
One of the changes is an increasing proportion of BAME Londoners, which is
projected to reach 50 per cent of the Greater London population by 2038 and is
projected to increase from 3.3 million in 2011 to 5.2 million in 2041 [5].
Transport for London 7

Changing proportion of Londoners of White / BAME ethnicity [5]
The growth in London’s BAME population is not expected to be even across each
group. Far greater growth is predicted in Chinese and Asian communities than
black Caribbean and Indian. The percentage growth for each of the communities is
shown in the table below [5].
Changing proportion of Londoners by ethnicity [5]
Community
% increase
2011-2041
White 4.4
Black Caribbean 7.2
Indian 38.5
Black African 52.4
Bangladeshi 54.7
Pakistani 57.2
Chinese 59.9
Other 74.4
Other Asian 87.9
Black other 94.1
Although international immigration into London is falling, previously higher levels
now mean that over half (55 per cent) of live births in London in 2012 were to
mothers born overseas [6].
The population is ageing, with a predicted increase in London’s population aged
over 65 increasing by 75 per cent between 2011 and 2041 compared with a 26 per
cent increase of the Greater London population as a whole [4].
The geographic distribution of age groups across London varies, and therefore the
transport challenges in each area will vary. The map below demonstrates that
Transport for London 8

outer London has a higher proportion of people over 75 years of age. Demand for
accessible transport in these areas may be higher as a result of this population
composition [5].
Predicted geographic distribution of over 75s in 2031 [5]
The proportion of younger Londoners (under 25) is predicted to increase at a
slower rate than the rest of the population with a 13 per cent increase between
2011 and 2041 [5].
Increasing challenges
As London’s population growth outstrips increases in housing supply, prices within
inner London are rising. In time, those with lower incomes will be priced out of the
inner London area, resulting in a move towards outer London. It is vital, therefore,
to ensure that access to transport services continues to improve, linking people to
higher paid jobs.
Since 2006 the average number of jobs available within 45 minutes travel time by
public transport has increased by 6.2% for London residents [7]. This trend needs
to continue in order to increase access for our diverse communities.
Transport for London 9

Predicted employment growth 2011 – 2036 (measurement: number of additional jobs) [11]
The number of trips made each day on public transport by disabled Londoners has
increased from 0.50 per person per day to 0.57 in 10 years since 2001. However,
this is still lower than 0.86 per day for the whole population. Of these trips, the bus
is more popular than for the general population (0.44 trips per day compared with
0.40) [8].
Many Londoners suffer health problems from lack of physical activity. The number
of walking trips per day for people under 20 between 2001 and 2011 has decreased
as shown below [7]. Similarly, in the period 2013-14 obesity in children in London
was over 18% higher than across the rest of England [9].
Conversely, walking trips have increased among some of the older age groups
since 2011, particularly for men. The pattern for women changes significantly
through their lifetime. The number of trips between the age of 30 and 54 for
women increased between 2001 and 2011 and at age 35-39 women’s walk trips are
almost double that of men [7].
Transport for London 10

Walking trip rates (average weekday) for London residents, by age and gender, for the
years 2001 and 2011 [7]
Men in 2001
Men in 2011
Women in 2001
Women in 2011
Addressing these challenges through transport
An accessible transport system is vital to help address these challenges, to provide
opportunities for all of our diverse communities and to make life in London better.
Access to a range of transport modes improves access to employment, health,
education and leisure services for Londoners. Enabling walking and cycling for as
many as possible as part of a journey, or as the entire journey will be an important
aspect of reducing emissions and improving Londoners’ health.
We are committed to providing accessible transport and supporting Londoners
and those visiting the capital to travel irrespective of physical abilities or perceived
barriers.
In order to understand what the barriers to travel are and what can be done to
address them, we conduct and commission extensive surveys, research and
consultation. As well as listening to our customers and stakeholders including
specific independent advisory boards such as the IDAG (Independent Disability
Advisory Group), we have developed our Single Equality Scheme (SES). The SES
sets out our goals and activity to remove barriers to travel in London.
TfL invests funds across the entire network to improve our service. Recent
improvements include:
Increasing the number of pedestrian crossings with Countdown timers to 340
sites across London
Transport for London 11

Expansion of the Travel Better campaign, which includes raising awareness of
the need to be considerate on the Tube, particularly ensuring seats are
provided for those that may need them
39 additional pedestrian crossings have been upgraded to provide tactile
paving and rotating cones/audible alerts. We are aiming to have upgraded all
crossings to this standard by 2016
Additional step free access at stations, with works continuing at Bond Street,
Greenford, Tottenham Court Road, Vauxhall, Victoria and Finsbury Park
45 per cent of Tube and rail stations are now step-free
Tactile paving has been installed on 696 of 711 Tube platforms
Successfully trialled ‘zero tolerance’ areas for advertising boards to reduce
street clutter where demand for footways and pavement widths are
constrained, providing a more accessible environment to all
New trains on the District line, Circle, Hammersmith & City and Metropolitan
lines. These trains provide level access, wide doors, a ‘walk-through’ design to
reduce overcrowding, dedicated wheelchair spaces, advanced audio and visual
announcements and low floors
Modification of the Emirates Air Line cable car cabins to allow motorised
scooters on board (to a particular size)
Hosting the first accessible transport exhibition, Access all Areas, to provide
people with a range of transport information and give first-hand experience
with full-scale mock-ups of Tube stations equipped with ramps and ‘talking’
bollards which give directions to visually-impaired people. The event was free
to attendees and following its success will now be held biannually.
These are some of the recent improvements that TfL has made. However there is
more that we can and must do to respond to the needs of London’s diverse and
growing population. We provide an annual progress report measured against the
Single Equality Scheme, demonstrating what we have achieved so far and the
ways in which we continue to develop our equality activities. The SES is updated
every three to four years to ensure that it continues to align with customer and
stakeholder requirements. It will next be published in 2016.
Transport for London 12

Summary
Profile of equality groups in London
The 2011 Census recorded that there are 8,173,941 people who usually live in
London and this is set to grow in the coming decades. London’s population is
extremely diverse and ever-changing [2].
BAME Londoners make up 40 per cent of the population [2]
Half of Londoners are women (51 per cent) [2]
Thirty-two per cent of Londoners are under the age of 25 and 11 per cent are
aged 65 or over [2]
Disabled Londoners make up 14 per cent of the population [2]
Thirty-seven per cent of Londoners are living in a household with an annual
income of less than £20,000 [12]
The percentage of Londoners who consider themselves to be lesbian, gay or
bisexual is 2. 5 per cent [13].
There are differences in the profile of Londoners who make up each equality
group:
Londoners living in a lower income household (less than £20,000 per year) and
older Londoners (aged 65 or over) are more likely to be women [12]
BAME Londoners are more likely to be younger, while women and those living
in lower income households are more likely to be older [2]
Men are more likely than women, and white Londoners are more likely than
BAME Londoners to be working, this may be linked in part to the different age
profile of these equality groups [12]
Note on data sources
There are two main sources of demographic data used in this document: the Office for
National Statistics Census indicated with reference [2] and the London Travel Demand
Survey indicated with reference [12]. Where two sources exist, this report generally refers
to the Census as this is considered the most robust source of profile data due to the large
sample size. There may be small differences observed in the specific proportions recorded.
Transport for London 13

Please note that many of the groups in this report are interrelated and therefore
some of the differences observed are affected by differences in their demographic
profile. For instance, those people on low incomes are also more likely to be older
people (23 per cent of those on low income are also 65+; as shown in column D)
and therefore they are less likely to use technology but are more likely to own a
freedom pass. Another example is that BAME are more likely to be younger (36
per cent of BAME Londoners are also aged 24 & under; as shown in column A) and
are therefore more likely to use technology and to travel for education and are less
likely to own a freedom pass. Disabled people are another example, as they are
more likely to be older (44 per cent of disabled people are also over 65; as shown in
column E) and are also more likely to be on a low income (69 per cent of disabled
people are also on low incomes, as shown in column E).
Overlap between groups: table showing the proportion of each group across the top,
made up by each group at the side
Bold numbers are where a group has a higher proportion compared to other groups (For
instance 19% of 65+ are also BAME). (2013/14) [12]
%
A B C D E F
BAME 65+ Aged 24
& under
Less
than
£20,000
Disable
d
Women
Base (5,563) (2,475) (4,220) (5,510) (1,821) (8,182)
BAME 19% 47% 45% 30% 37%
65+ 7% 23% 44% 13%
Aged 24 & under 36% 31% 9% 28%
Less than £20,000 43% 65% 41% 69% 40%
Disabled 9% 37% 4% 20% 11%
Women 51% 55% 49% 56% 56%
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five
Transport for London 14

The following table provides LTDS demographic data as this has the most directly comparable travel data by demographic profile
of equality groups (2013/14) [12]
Gender
Age
Ethnicity
Household
income
Working status
(16+)
Disabled
(limiting daily
activity/ ability
to travel)
% All Men Women White BAME Aged 24 &
under
65+ Less than
£20,000
Disabled
Nondisabled
Base (15,700) (7,518) (8,182) (10,044) (5,563) (4,220) (2,475) (5,510) (1,821) (13,879)
Men 49 - - 49 49 51 45 44 44 50
Women 51 - - 51 51 49 55 56 56 50
5-10 8 8 8 6 11 - - 9 2 9
11-15 6 6 6 5 8 - - 7 2 6
16-24 14 14 14 12 17 - - 15 5 15
25-59 55 55 55 55 55 - - 41 38 57
60-64 5 5 5 5 4 - - 4 9 4
65-70 5 5 5 7 3 - - 8 11 5
71-80 5 4 5 6 3 - - 9 17 3
81+ 3 2 3 4 1 - - 6 16 1
White 62 62 62 - - 52 81 55 69 61
BAME 37 37 37 - - 47 19 45 30 38
Less than £10,000 17 15 20 15 21 20 34 - 41 15
£10,000–£19,999 19 17 20 17 22 21 31 - 28 18
£20,000–£34,999 20 20 19 19 21 20 17 - 15 20
£35,000–£49,999 13 14 13 14 13 12 7 - 6 14
£50,000–£74,999 15 16 14 17 12 14 6 - 5 16
£75,000+ 16 18 14 19 11 13 6 - 6 17
Working full-time 40 45 32 50 42 24 5 15 8 52
Working part-time 10 5 12 11 12 8 6 10 5 12
Student 9 11 10 8 16 54 - 12 3 11
Retired 13 13 17 18 9 - 86 24 48 11
Not working 14 11 21 13 21 12 3 23 35 13
Yes 11 9 11 12 9 4 37 20 - -
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five and working status does not include under 16s.
Transport for London 15

Travel behaviour
Walking is the most common form of public transport for all Londoners. Almost all
Londoners walk every week (96 per cent). Disabled Londoners are less likely to walk at least
weekly (78 per cent); almost all younger Londoners walk at least once a week in London (99
per cent) [12].
The bus is the next most commonly used type of transport in London: 61 per cent of
Londoners use the bus at least once a week. Younger Londoners are the most likely equality
group to use the bus at least weekly; 7 in 10 Londoners aged under 25 do so (71 per cent).
Men and white Londoners are slightly less likely than average to use the bus once a week
(58 per cent and 57 per cent respectively) [12].
Disabled Londoners and Londoners over 65 years old use the UndergroundTube less than
other groups on a weekly basis (16 per cent of disabled Londoners and 23 per cent of
Londoners over 65; compared with 39 per cent of all Londoners) [12].
Transport for London 16

Proportion of Londoners using modes of transport at least once a week (2013/14) [12]
% All Men Women White BAME Aged 24
& under
65+ All less
than
£20,000
Disabled
Nondisabled
Base (15,700) (7,518) (8,182) (10,044) (5,563) (4,220) (2,475) (5,510) (1,821) (14,114)
Walking 96 97 96 95 97 99 86 94 78 98
Bus 61 58 65 57 68 71 61 70 56 62
Car as passenger 48 42 55 47 50 66 45 44 47 48
Car as driver 39 44 35 43 33 8 45 26 26 41
Tube 39 42 35 40 37 33 23 31 16 41
National Rail 17 19 15 19 14 13 11 11 8 18
Overground 9 10 8 9 10 8 4 8 4 10
Other taxi/minicab
6 6 6 6
5
8 6
6
6
6
(PHV)
London taxi/ black cab 5 6 4 6 2 2 5 3 3 5
DLR 4 5 4 3 6 4 2 4 4 5
Tram 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 2
Motorcycle 1 2 - 2 - - - 1 1 1
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Transport for London 17

Tickets and passes
Oyster card ownership is related to age:
Younger Londoners are the most likely equality group to hold an Oyster card: 75 per
cent of 16 to 24-year-olds have one [12]
Older people are least likely to hold an Oyster card: only six per cent of Londoners
aged 65 or over have one. Most older Londoners (aged 65 or over) hold an older
person’s Freedom Pass (92 per cent) and this accounts for the lower proportion of
Oyster cards held in this group [12]
Transport for London 18

Possession of an Oyster card or Freedom Pass (2013/14) [12]
%
All Men Women White BAME 16-24 65+ Income Disabled Nondisabled

Barriers to public transport use
The most commonly mentioned barrier to using public transport more often across all
Londoners is overcrowded services, which is mentioned by 59 per cent of Londoners. 16
to 24 year olds (65 per cent), BAME Londoners (64 per cent) and women (60 per cent) are
the most likely equality groups to cite this barrier [14].
Cost of tickets, safety and security issues and slow journey times are more commonly
mentioned as barriers by some equality groups than across all Londoners.
Cost of tickets is more often mentioned as a barrier to public transport use by BAME
Londoners (53 per cent) and younger Londoners (49 per cent aged between 16 and
24) [14]
Slow journey times is also one of the main barriers to public transport use mentioned
(41 per cent of all Londoners). This is a particularly big barrier for younger Londoners
aged between 16 and 24 and BAME Londoners (both 50 per cent)
Concerns about antisocial behaviour and crime are particularly mentioned as barriers
to public transport use by Londoners living in DE households (social grade D refers to
semi- and un-skilled manual workers and E refers to state pensioners, casual/lowest
grade workers and unemployed Londoners) of whom 41 per cent say that concerns
about antisocial behaviour affect their travel frequency, BAME Londoners (40 per
cent), disabled Londoners (38 per cent) and women (38 per cent). The average among
all Londoners is 34 per cent [14]
Transport for London 20

Safety and security
TfL uses a typology of worry to monitor the perceptions of Londoners with regard to
their personal security while using public transport in London. The typology classifies
people into:
Unworried – reports no general worry and no episodes of recent worry
Unexpressed fear – reports no general worry, but specific recent episodes
Anxious – reports general worry, but no specific recent episodes
Worried – reports general worry and specific recent episodes
Don’t know
Three-quarters of Londoners (75 per cent) fall into the ‘unworried’ category. Londoners
aged 65 or over are the most likely to be ‘unworried’ (83 per cent). LGB Londoners (69 per
cent), BAME Londoners (70 per cent) and women (70 per cent) are the least likely to be
‘unworried’ [14].
Younger Londoners (65 per cent), BAME Londoners (62 per cent) and women (61 per
cent) are the most likely to say that that their frequency of travel is affected ‘a lot’ or ‘a
little’ because of concerns over crime or antisocial behaviour [14].
The relationship between concerns around safety and security and equality groups is
complex. For example, age, ethnicity, income and whether a person is disabled are all
likely to be interrelated. Likewise the travel patterns, preferences and area in which
someone lives also play a part.
Access to information
Ninety-two per cent of Londoners have access to the internet. Older Londoners who are
aged 65 or over and disabled Londoners are least likely to have access to the internet (64
per cent and 76 per cent access the internet respectively). Almost all young Londoners
aged between 16 and 24 have internet access (99 per cent) [15].
Nearly 4 out of 5 Londoners use a smartphone (77 per cent). Older Londoners (25 per
cent) and disabled Londoners (44 per cent) are least likely to use smartphone. In
comparison, almost all 16 to 24 year olds own or use a smartphone (96 per cent) [15].
Nearly 4 in 5 Londoners (78 per cent) use the TfL website. This figure is lower among
those over 65 and disabled Londoners (47 per cent and 54 per cent respectively).
Younger Londoners are most likely to access the TfL website, with eighty-three per cent
of Londoners aged 16-24 using it [15].
Use of technology continues to grow across all equality groups in terms of internet
access, smartphone use and use of the TfL website. However, it is worth noting that
although there has been growth in technology use amongst older and disabled
Londoners, use remains lower than for the overall population [15].
Transport for London 21

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Summary: Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME)
Londoners
Key findings
BAME Londoners account for 40 per cent of the London population [2]
Walking is the most commonly used type of transport by BAME Londoners (97 per cent
of BAME Londoners walk at least once a week compared with 95 per cent of white
Londoners)
After walking, the most commonly used type of transport by BAME Londoners is the
bus (68 per cent BAME compared with 57 per cent white) [12]
BAME Londoners cite a greater number of barriers to increased public transport use
than white Londoners [14]
BAME Londoners are more likely to be classified as ‘worried’ and also slightly more
likely to take precautions against crime when travelling [14]
In general BAME Londoners give slightly lower overall satisfaction ratings than white
Londoners for most transport types. This is likely to be related to the younger age
profile [16]
Internet access is higher for BAME Londoners than white Londoners (96 per cent BAME
compared with 91 per cent white). However, this difference is driven by the younger age
profile of BAME Londoners. When looking only at Londoners aged 16-64, there is no
discernible difference in internet access between BAME and white Londoners [15]
Profile of BAME Londoners
BAME Londoners account for 40 per cent of the London population. There are
some demographic differences between BAME Londoners and white Londoners.
Most notably, BAME Londoners have a much younger age profile than white
Londoners. Forty-one per cent of BAME Londoners are aged 24 and under
compared to 26 per cent of white Londoners [2].
BAME Londoners are less likely than white Londoners to be in employment (57 per
cent BAME compared with 64 per cent white) [2]. They are also more likely to live
in households with an average annual income below £20,000 (43 per cent BAME
compared with 32 per cent white) [12].
The majority of Londoners have English as their main language (78 per cent).
However, four per cent do not speak English well [2].
Transport behaviour
Walking is the most commonly used form of transport by BAME Londoners (97 per
cent BAME compared with 95 per cent white). After walking, the bus is the most
common type of transport used by BAME Londoners: 68 per cent of BAME
Londoners use the bus at least once a week compared to 57 per cent of white
Londoners.
Among different BAME groups bus use varies: 77 per cent of black, 72 per cent of
Londoners from an ‘other’ ethnic group, 70 per cent of mixed ethnic group
Transport for London – Women 22

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Londoners and 61 per cent of Asian Londoners use the bus at least once a week
[12].
The use of cars among BAME Londoners is lower than for white Londoners; 33 per cent of
BAME Londoners drive a car at least once a week compared to 43 per cent of white
Londoners [12].
Driving a car is higher among Asian Londoners compared to other BAME groups
(39 per cent of Asian Londoners drive a car at least once a week compared with 28
per cent of black Londoners) [12].
Cycling levels of BAME Londoners and white Londoners are very similar. Eighteen
per cent of BAME Londoners cycle in London at least sometimes compared to 17
per cent of white Londoners [17].
Barriers
Compared to white Londoners, BAME Londoners are more likely to mention a
larger number of potential barriers that prevent them from increasing their use of
public transport [14].
Cost is more of a barrier to increased public transport use among BAME
Londoners than white Londoners (53 per cent BAME compared with 40 per cent
white) [14].
Alongside cost, the barriers to greater public transport use most commonly
mentioned by BAME Londoners are overcrowding (64 per cent), slow journey
times (50 per cent), unreliable services (43 per cent), concerns about antisocial
behaviour (40 per cent) and dirty environments on the bus or train (39 per cent)
[14].
We use a typology of worry to assess Londoners’ attitudes to safety and security
when using the public transport network. Most Londoners are classified as
‘unworried’. BAME Londoners are less likely than white Londoners to be
‘unworried’ (70 per cent BAME compared with 80 per cent white) and also more
likely to be classified as ‘worried’ (seven per cent BAME compared with four per
cent white) [14].
A slightly higher proportion of BAME Londoners than white Londoners take
precautions against crime when using public transport (40 per cent BAME
compared with 38 per cent white). The most common precaution for BAME
Londoners is to sit by other people (44 per cent), whereas for white Londoners it is
to look after their belongings (36 per cent). [14].
BAME Londoners, both adults and children, are almost twice as likely as white
Londoners to be injured on the roads [18]. BAME Londoners are less likely than
white Londoners to say that they feel safe from road accidents when walking
around London at night (60 per cent BAME compared with 74 per cent white) [19].
Transport for London – Women 23

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Customer satisfaction
BAME customers are slightly less satisfied with the transport they use than white
customers. This applies to overall satisfaction, satisfaction with value for money
and other attributes, and is relevant across most types of transport. This is likely to
be related to the younger age profile of BAME Londoners.
BAME customers using the bus are slightly less satisfied overall than white
customers (83 out of 100 BAME compared with 86 out of 100 white) [16]
Satisfaction with value for money of bus travel among BAME customers has
risen again in 2014/2015 to 70 out of 100 from 67 out of 100 in 2013/14, having
risen from 64 to 67 in 2012/ 2013. However, this remains slightly lower than
among white customers (70 out 100 BAME compared with 74 out of 100 white)
[16]
Overall satisfaction with the Tube among BAME customers is also slightly
lower than among white customers (83 out of 100 BAME compared with 85 out
of 100 white) [16]
Access to information
A higher proportion of BAME Londoners have access to the internet than white
Londoners (96 per cent BAME compared with 91 per cent white). This is almost
entirely due to the older age profile of white Londoners, as the proportion of
BAME and white Londoners aged between 16 and 64 who access the internet is
very similar (98 per cent BAME 16-64 year olds compared with 96 per cent white
16-64 year olds) [15].
Both BAME and white 16 to 64-year-old Londoners tend to access the internet in
similar places.
Ninety-four per cent of BAME and 95 per cent of white Londoners aged
between 16 and 64 access the internet at home
Sixty-eight per cent of BAME 16-64 year olds access the internet ‘on the move’
compared with 70 per cent of white Londoners of this age
Sixty-three per cent of BAME 16 to 64year olds access the internet at work,
compared with sixty-six per cent of white Londoners [36].
Transport for London – Women 24

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Introduction
London is one of the most ethnically and culturally diverse cities in the world with
black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people making up 40 per cent of the city’s
population [2]. More than 300 languages are spoken and multiple faiths are
practised here [20].
The age structure of BAME Londoners tends to be younger than white Londoners,
and it is estimated that, by 2031, more than half of London’s 15 to 19 year olds will
belong to a BAME group and the proportion of all Londoners from a BAME ethnic
group will reach 51 per cent by 2041 [21].
Our Single Equality Scheme addresses many of the issues identified in the
research presented in this document [22].
This chapter focuses on transport issues relevant to BAME Londoners. For the
purposes of this section, Londoners are grouped according to their reported
ethnicity as follows:
Breakdown of ethnic groups used in this report [12]
Ethnic groups
White English/Welsh/Scottish/Northern Irish
White Irish
Other white British
Other white
Black or black British – Caribbean
Black or black British – African
Black or black British – other black background
Asian or Asian British – Indian
Asian or Asian British – Pakistani
Asian or Asian British – Bangladeshi
Asian or Asian British – Chinese
Asian or Asian British – other Asian background
Mixed or multiple ethnic groups – white and black
Caribbean
Mixed or multiple ethnic groups – white and black
African
Mixed or multiple ethnic groups – white and Asian
Other mixed or multiple ethnic background
Other ethnic group – Arab
Other ethnic group – any other
White
Black
Asian
Mixed
Other
White
Black, Asian
and minority
ethnic (BAME)
Transport for London – Women 25

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Profile of BAME Londoners
Forty per cent of Londoners are from a BAME group [2]. This has increased
significantly since 2001 when the comparative figure was 29 per cent and the
proportion is forecast to increase further in future [23]. Population projections
suggest that the proportion of BAME Londoners will rise to 51 per cent by 2041
[21].
Ethnic groups in London from the ONS Census [2]
% 2011 Census 2001 Census 1
White 60 71
BAME 40 29
Black/African/Caribbean/black British 13 11
Asian/Asian British 18 12
Mixed/other 8 6
We survey Londoners on an ongoing basis as part of the London Travel Demand Survey.
LTDS is a sample survey of Londoners and the equivalent figure from this survey is 62 per
cent white and 37 per cent BAME [12].
LTDS ethnic groups in London (2013/14) [12]
% LTDS
Base (15,700)
White 62
BAME 37
Black 13
Asian 18
Mixed/other 6
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Where percentages do not add up to 100, this is due to rounding and refused codes.
1 There is a slight change in the definition of ethnic groups between the 2001 and 2011 Census. See
www.ons.gov.uk for details.
Transport for London – Women 26

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
LTDS demographic profile of ethnic groups in London (2013/14) [12]
% All White BAME Black Asian Mixed Other
Base (15,700) (10,044) (5,563) (1,903) (2,785) (488) (387)
Gender
Men 49 49 49 47 51 47 47
Women 51 51 51 53 49 53 53
Age
5-10 8 6 11 13 9 23 8
11-15 6 5 8 8 6 13 7
16-24 14 12 17 17 15 24 19
25-59 55 55 55 53 59 37 55
60-64 5 5 4 3 5 2 4
65-70 5 7 3 2 3 1 4
71-80 5 6 3 3 3 1 2
81+ 3 4 1 1 1 - 1
Household income
Less than £10,000 17 15 21 26 16 16 31
£10,000–£19,999 19 17 22 27 18 23 27
£20,000–£34,999 20 19 21 21 23 18 17
£35,000–£49,999 13 14 13 12 14 11 12
£50,000–£74,999 15 17 12 8 14 18 5
£75,000+ 16 19 11 6 15 14 7
Working status*
Working full-time 47 50 42 39 45 41 31
Working part-time 11 11 12 13 11 11 13
Student 10 8 16 17 13 22 16
Retired 15 18 9 9 10 3 7
Not working 16 13 21 21 20 22 32
Disabled
Yes 11 12 9 10 8 5 11
No 89 88 91 90 92 95 89
Impairment affects travel
Yes 10 11 8 9 7 5 10
No 90 89 92 91 93 95 90
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five and working status does not include under 16s. All TfL surveys use the
Equality Act 2010 to define ‘disabled people’ as: ‘those who define themselves as having a long-term physical or mental disability or health
issue that impacts on their daily activities, the work they can do or limits their ability to travel’.
Transport for London – Women 27

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
BAME Londoners tend to have a younger age profile than white Londoners. Fortyone
per cent of BAME Londoners are under 25, compared to 26 per cent of white
Londoners [2].
Number of Londoners by ethnic group 2011 [2]
This younger age profile of BAME Londoners has an impact on many of the travel
behaviours covered in this chapter and should be kept in mind when using the results.
Transport for London – Women 28

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Employment and income
The Census data and LTDS show similar patterns in terms of employment and
income levels although the exact percentages do differ slightly. According to the
Census, 57 per cent of BAME Londoners are in employment compared with 64 per
cent of white Londoners aged 16 or over [2].
More BAME Londoners are in education than white Londoners (the Census
records 12 per cent BAME compared with five per cent white) [2].
Reflecting the older age profile, more white Londoners are retired than BAME
Londoners (the Census records 8 per cent BAME compared with 17 per cent white)
[2].
2011 Census – Economic activity of Londoners (16 years old and over) [2]
% White BAME
Employed 64 57
Unemployed 4 7
Students (economically inactive) 5 12
Retired 17 8
Long-term sick/disabled/other 6 8
Looking after home/family 4 7
Students fall into employed, unemployed and economically inactive categories.
Higher proportions of BAME Londoners have an annual household income of
below £20,000 (43 per cent) than white Londoners (32 per cent) [12].
Transport for London – Women 29

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Languages spoken
Twenty-two per cent of Londoners have a language other than English as their
first language, with Polish (two per cent), Bengali (one per cent), Gujarati (one per
cent), French (one per cent) and Urdu (one per cent) being the top five main
languages spoken [2]. This shows the wide range of languages used in London,
and according to the Greater London Authority (GLA) 300 languages are spoken
across the city [24].
European languages are spoken by 42 per cent of residents whose main language
is not English, making them the largest language group in London. South Asian
languages are spoken by 29 per cent of people whose main language is not
English. The remaining 29 per cent are split relatively equally among African (eight
per cent), Middle Eastern which includes Turkish and Arabic (eight per cent), East
Asian (seven per cent) and West/Central Asian languages (five per cent).
Languages outside these groups, such as Caribbean Creole and sign language,
account for the remaining one per cent [25].
The 2011 Census revealed that four per cent of Londoners have difficulty speaking
English. Difficulties speaking English are more common among older Londoners.
Two per cent of those aged between three and 15 do not speak English well
compared with six per cent of 65 year olds and over.
2011 Census – Londoners’ ability to speak English [2]
% English is main
language
English not main
language but spoken
well
English not spoken
well
All 78 18 4
Age
3-15 85 13 2
16-24 79 19 2
25-34 69 27 4
35-49 74 21 5
50-64 81 13 5
65+ 86 8 6
Transport for London – Women 30

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Religion and beliefs
The 2011 Census shows that the representation of religion and beliefs of
Londoners has changed over the last 10 years. There has been a decline in the
proportion of Londoners considering themselves to be Christian (58 per cent to 48
per cent), and there has also been an increase in the proportion who do not
identify with any religion (16 per cent to 21 per cent) [2].
The largest religious and faith groups in London are:
Religions and faith groups in London [23, AB]
% 2011 2001
Christianity 48 58
Islam 12 9
Hinduism 5 4
Judaism 2 2
Sikhism 2 2
Buddhism 1 1
Other 1 1
Not religious 21 16
Undeclared 8 9
Religion varies considerably between ethnic groups:
While 28 per cent of white and 27 per cent of mixed Londoners report they
have no religion, only seven per cent of black and eight per cent of Asian
Londoners report this
More than half of black (68 per cent) and white (57 per cent) Londoners report
that they are Christian
Asian Londoners and Londoners who have selected ‘other’ to describe their
ethnic group are most likely to be Muslims (36 per cent of Asian Londoners and
50 per cent of Londoners selecting ‘other’ ethnic group are Muslims)
Religion by ethnic group [2]
% White BAME Black Asian Mixed Other
Christian 57 36 68 12 47 22
Buddhist - 2 - 4 1 1
Hindu - 12 - 26 1 2
Jewish 3 - - - 1 3
Muslim 3 27 15 36 10 50
Sikh - 4 - 7 - 4
Other religion - 1 - 1 1 1
No religion 28 10 7 8 27 10
Religion not stated 9 8 9 6 12 9
Transport for London – Women 31

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
London boroughs
Some London boroughs have a higher proportion of BAME residents than others.
Those with the largest proportion of BAME residents are:
London boroughs with highest proportion of BAME residents [2]
Borough
% of BAME
residents
Newham 71
Brent 64
Harrow 58
Redbridge 57
Tower Hamlets 55
The boroughs with the smallest proportion of BAME residents are:
London boroughs with lowest proportion of BAME residents [2]
Borough
% of BAME
residents
Havering 12
Richmond upon Thames 14
Bromley 16
Bexley 18
Sutton 21
There is a high concentration of BAME residents in the most deprived boroughs in London.
According to Indices of Deprivation released by the ONS, the most deprived boroughs in
London are Hackney, Newham, Tower Hamlets and Islington [26], all of which have large
proportions of BAME residents.
Transport for London – Women 32

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Travel behaviour
The average number of trips completed per weekday (among those travelling on
any weekday) varies slightly according to ethnicity. On average, BAME Londoners
make 2.5 trips per weekday, compared to 2.8 trips made by white Londoners.
Transport types used
Walking at least once a week is almost universal across all ethnic groups. After
walking, the most commonly used types of transport for all Londoners are buses,
cars (as both drivers and passengers) and the Tube [12].
The proportion of Londoners using each type of transport at least once a week
varies according to ethnicity. BAME Londoners are more likely than white
Londoners to use the bus at least once a week (68 per cent BAME compared with
57 per cent white). In contrast, lower proportions of BAME Londoners travel at
least once a week by car (as the driver), black cab and National Rail than white
Londoners. Few differences are seen between white and BAME Londoners for
their frequency of use of minicabs, the Overground, trams and the Tube [12].
Looking specifically at the differences between ethnic minority groups, the use of
buses is particularly high among black Londoners, with 77 per cent using this type
of transport at least once a week, compared to 68 per cent of all BAME Londoners
and 57 per cent of white Londoners) [12]. Research among BAME Londoners
suggests this is because buses are seen to be cheaper than other transport options
and have a more comprehensive route network [27].
The use of cars (as the driver) tends to be higher among Asian Londoners than
other BAME groups [12].
Transport for London – Women 33

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Proportion of Londoners using types of transport at least once a week (2013/14) [12]
% All White BAME Black Asian Mixed Other
Base (15,700) (10,044) (5,563) (1,903) (2,785) (488) (387)
Walking 96 95 97 97 97 98 97
Bus 61 57 68 77 61 70 72
Car (as a passenger) 48 47 50 45 53 58 51
Car (as a driver) 39 43 33 28 39 22 33
Tube 39 40 37 34 37 35 46
National Rail 17 19 14 16 12 18 9
Overground 9 9 10 13 7 13 13
Other taxi/minicab
6 6 6
(PHV)
8 4 6 5
London taxi/black cab 5 6 2 1 3 3 5
DLR 4 3 6 7 6 4 4
Tram 2 2 2 3 1 2 -
Motorbike 1 2 - - - - 1
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Where there is more detailed information on the use of individual types of
transport, we have included a sub-section below.
Walking
There is little difference between the frequency of walking among BAME and
white Londoners. Ninety-seven per cent of BAME Londoners walk at least once a
week, which is very similar to white Londoners where 95 per cent walk at least
once a week [12].
BAME Londoners are slightly more likely than white Londoners to walk on a daily
basis (85 per cent of BAME Londoners walk five or more days a week compared
with 81 per cent of white Londoners) [12].
Frequency of walking (2013/14) [12]
% All White BAME Black Asian Mixed Other
Base (15,700) (10,044) (5,563) (1,903) (2,785) (488) (387)
5 or more days a
week
83 81 85 88 83 88 86
3 or 4 days a week 6 7 5 4 6 4 6
2 days a week 4 4 4 3 5 3 4
1 day a week 3 3 3 3 3 2 2
At least once a
fortnight
1 1 1 - 1 1 1
At least once a
month
1 1 1 - 1 1 -
At least once a year 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Not used in last year 1 2 1 1 1 - -
Never used - - - - - - -
Transport for London – Women 34

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Transport for London – Women 35

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
The purpose of journeys made by walking varies between BAME and white
Londoners:
BAME Londoners are more likely than white Londoners to walk (at least once a
week) to get to/from work, school or college (66 per cent BAME compared
with 44 per cent white) and to take a child to school (29 per cent BAME
compared with 12 per cent white)
White Londoners are more likely than BAME Londoners to walk (at least once
a week) to visit pubs/restaurants/cinemas and other social places (44 per cent
BAME compared with 59 per cent white)
BAME Londoners are slightly more likely to walk as part of a longer journey (79
per cent BAME compared with 75 per cent white) [19]
Walking at least once a week by purpose of journey (2015) [19]
% who walk at least once a week All White BAME
Base (1,000) (731) (232)
Walk…
To complete small errands such as getting a 86 88 84
newspaper or posting a letter
As part of a longer journey 77 75 79
To visit pubs/restaurants/cinemas and other 53 59 44
social places
To get to work/school/college 52 44 66
To visit friends and relatives 49 50 48
To take a child to school 18 12 29
Bus
Bus use among BAME Londoners is higher than among white Londoners (68 per
cent BAME compared with 57 per cent white Londoners using the bus at least once
per week). The proportion of black Londoners using the bus at least once a week is
77 per cent which is considerably higher than any other ethnic group (70 per cent
of mixed Londoners and 61 per cent of Asian Londoners use the bus at least once a
week) [12].
The greater use of buses by BAME Londoners is also shown by comparing data
from the Bus User Survey (2014) against the proportion of BAME Londoners in the
population. Forty-seven per cent of day bus users and 46 per cent of night bus
users are BAME customers, whereas BAME Londoners account for only 40 per
cent of the total London population [28].
Comparison of day and night bus users with London population (2014) [28, AB]
% White BAME Black Asian Mixed
All Londoners* [2] 60 40 8 18 13
Transport for London – Women 36

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Day bus users 52 47 20 14 4
Night bus users 54 46 17 13 5
Table excludes under 16s.
*Please note that figures for ‘All Londoners’ come from the 2011 Census.
BAME bus users are as likely as white customers to take the bus to or from work
during the day (54 per cent of BAME bus users travel to or from work during the
day compared with 53 per cent of white bus users, and 52 per cent of BAME
Londoners compared with 51 per cent white Londoners at night). A higher
proportion of white Londoners travelling by bus at night are doing so for leisure
purposes compared to BAME bus users (17 per cent BAME compared with 27 per
cent white). White bus users are also more likely to be travelling for leisure
purposes during the day (6 per cent BAME compared with 12 per cent white)
although the difference is less marked than at night.
Purpose of bus journey by ethnic group and time of day (2014) [28]
During the day
At night
% White BAME White BAME
Base (weighted) (17,221) (15,109) (4,192) (3,550)
To/from or for work 53 54 51 52
To/from
4 10 2 5
school/education
To/from shopping 12 9 1 2
Visiting
9 9 13 15
friends/relatives
Leisure 12 6 27 17
Personal business 6 8 2 2
Other purpose 3 4 5 6
Transport for London – Women 37

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Black Londoners are the most likely ethnic group to use a bus on a daily basis: 46
per cent of black Londoners do so compared with 28 per cent of all Londoners
[12].
Frequency of travelling by bus (2013/14) [12]
% All White BAME Black Asian Mixed Other
Base (15,700) (10,044) (5,563) (1,903) (2,785) (488) (387)
5 or more days a week 28 23 36 46 29 37 39
3 or 4 days a week 12 12 13 13 12 12 16
2 days a week 11 11 11 10 10 12 10
1 day a week 10 10 9 8 9 9 7
At least once a
fortnight
5 6 4 3 5 3 5
At least once a month 10 10 8 6 10 8 8
At least once a year 14 15 12 9 15 12 7
Not used in last year 7 9 5 3 7 4 4
Never used 2 2 2 1 3 2 4
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Car
BAME Londoners are less likely to hold a driving licence than white Londoners (54
per cent BAME aged 17 years or over compared with 69 per cent white). Asian
Londoners are slightly more likely than other BAME groups to hold a driving
licence (58 per cent).
The frequency with which people drive a car varies across BAME groups – 39 per
cent of Asian Londoners aged 17 years or over drive at least once a week
compared to 28 per cent of black Londoners and 22 per cent of mixed Londoners
[12].
Proportion of Londoners (aged 17+) with a full car driving licence (2013/14) [12]
% All White BAME Black Asian Mixed Other
Base (13,127) (8,742) (4,315) (1,456) (2,277) (274) (308)
Holds a full car driving 64 69 54 49 58 55 54
licence
Note that this table includes all Londoners aged 17 and over.
Transport for London – Women 38

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
BAME Londoners are less likely than white Londoners to live in a household that
owns or has access to a car (63 per cent BAME compared with 67 per cent white).
There are some big differences between BAME groups, with Asian Londoners
being the most likely to own or have access to a car (72 per cent) compared with 52
per cent of black Londoners and 60 per cent of mixed Londoners [12].
Proportion of Londoners in a household with access to a car (2013/14) [12]
% All White BAME Black Asian Mixed Other
Base (15,700) (10,044) (5,563) (1,903) (2,785) (488) (387)
0 cars 35 33 37 48 28 40 37
1 car 46 46 45 41 47 45 54
2+ cars 20 21 18 11 25 15 10
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Tube
Tube use among BAME Londoners is slightly lower than among white Londoners
(37 per cent of BAME Londoners use the Tube at least once a week compared to
40 per cent white). When looking at individual BAME groups there is very little
difference [12].
Frequency of travelling by Tube (2013/14) [12]
% All White BAME Black Asian Mixed Other
Base (15,700) (10,044) (5,563) (1,903) (2,785) (488) (387)
5 or more days a week 15 16 14 12 16 11 14
3 or 4 days a week 7 7 6 6 6 5 11
2 days a week 8 8 7 6 8 7 12
1 day a week 9 9 9 10 8 12 10
At least once a fortnight 8 8 8 7 8 9 6
At least once a month 15 14 15 16 15 13 14
At least once a year 25 23 28 29 27 32 21
Not used in last year 11 12 9 10 9 8 8
Never used 3 3 4 4 4 2 5
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Transport for London – Women 39

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Cycling
Cycling levels among BAME Londoners and white Londoners are very similar.
Eighteen per cent of BAME Londoners cycle in London at least sometimes,
compared with 17 per cent of white Londoners.
Proportion of Londoners who cycle (November 2014) [17]
% All White BAME
Base (2,192) (1,521) (671)
Cyclist (sometimes uses a bike to get
17 17 18
around London)
Non-cyclist (never uses a bike to get
around London)
83 83 82
There is also very little difference between white and BAME Londoners in
frequency of cycling (at least once a week) in London (14 per cent BAME
compared with 13 per cent white) [17].
Frequency of travelling by bicycle (November 2014) [17]
% All White BAME
Base (2,192) (1,521) (671)
5 or more days a week 4 4 3
3 or 4 days a week 5 4 5
2 days a week 3 3 3
1 day a week 2 2 3
At least once a fortnight 1 1 1
At least once a month 1 1 -
At least once a year 2 2 2
Not used in last year - - -
Never used 83 83 82
Most Londoners, regardless of whether they cycle currently, know how to ride a
bike. There is little difference between white and BAME Londoners in their ability
to ride a bike (83 per cent BAME compared with 84 per cent white) [17].
Proportion of Londoners able to ride a bike (November 2014) [17]
% All White BAME
Base (2,192) (1,521) (671)
Can ride a bike 83 84 83
Cannot ride a bike 17 16 17
Transport for London – Women 40

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
TfL has developed a behavioural change model to look at Londoners’ readiness to
cycle or cycle more if they already cycle around the city. According to this model,
white Londoners are more likely to be in the pre-contemplation stage, meaning
that they haven’t thought about cycling (more) or that they have thought about it,
but do not intend to do so (63 per cent of BAME and 72 per cent of white
Londoners) [17].
Behaviour change model of cycling (November 2014) [17]
% All White BAME
Base (2,192) (1,521) (671)
Pre-contemplation:
69 72 63
’You have thought about it but would be unlikely
to start in the future’
‘You have thought about it but don’t intend
starting in the future’
‘You have never thought of starting but could be
open to it in the future’
Contemplation:
10 8 12
‘You are thinking about starting in the future’
Preparation:
3 2 4
‘You have decided to start soon’
Change:
2 1 3
‘You have tried to start recently but are finding it
difficult’
‘You have started recently and are finding it quite
easy so far’
Sustained change:
10 11 9
‘You started a while ago and are still doing it
occasionally’
You started a while ago and are still doing it
regularly’
Lapsed:
‘You had started doing this but couldn’t stick to it’
6 5 8
Cycling schemes
Awareness of Cycle Hire is relatively high among all Londoners. However, BAME
Londoners are less likely than white Londoners to be aware (88 per cent BAME
compared with 93 per cent white).
Twenty one per cent of BAME Londoners have hired a bicycle through the scheme
compared with 15 per cent of white Londoners [17].
Seventeen per cent of casual Cycle Hire users (defined as not having a Cycle Hire
membership key) are BAME customers and 7 per cent of Cycle Hire members are
BAME customers [29].
Transport for London – Women 41

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Thirty seven per cent of BAME Londoners report that they will definitely/ probably
use the scheme in the next year compared with 22 per cent of white Londoners.
[17]
Expected use of Cycle Hire in the future (November 2014) [17]
% All White BAME
Base (1,180) (833) (347)
Yes, definitely/probably 27 22 37
Yes, definitely 9 7 13
Yes, probably 18 15 24
No, probably not 30 33 22
No, definitely not 33 36 27
Not sure 10 9 13
Across all ethnic groups, awareness of Cycle Superhighways is lower than for Cycle
Hire. In particular, BAME Londoners are less likely to be aware of Cycle
Superhighways: 53 per cent are aware compared to 65 per cent of white
Londoners [17].
The same proportion of BAME Londoners and white Londoners report that they
have used a Cycle Superhighway (10 per cent). BAME Londoners are again more
likely than white Londoners to say they will definitely/ probably use the
Superhighways in the future (28 per cent BAME compared with 21 per cent) [17].
Expected use of Cycle Superhighways in the future (November 2014) [17]
% All White BAME
Base (1,180) (833) (347)
Yes, definitely/ probably 23 21 28
Yes, definitely 6 6 7
Yes, probably 17 15 21
No, probably not 28 29 26
No, definitely not 31 34 26
Not sure 17 16 20
Transport for London – Women 42

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Dial-a-Ride
Thirty-five per cent of Dial-a-Ride members are BAME compared with 65 per cent
who are white. The proportion of BAME Dial-a-Ride members decreases as the
age of the member increases: 18 per cent of Dial-a-Ride members who are aged
90 or over are BAME [30].
Dial-a-Ride (DaR) membership by ethnicity (2014) [2,30]
% All disabled DaR 65-79 years 80-89 years 90+ years old
Londoners members
old
old-
Base (excludes
- (41,270) (10,312) (15,117) (8,144)
unknown data)
White 66 65 55 71 82
BAME 34 35 45 29 18
English is spoken by 94 per cent of Dial-a-Ride members. Gujarati and Punjabi are
the most common languages spoken by non-English speaking members [30].
Journey purpose
Across all travel in London, the purpose of journeys varies slightly by ethnicity,
especially between the ethnicity groups which make up BAME Londoners. BAME
Londoners are generally more likely than white Londoners to travel by public
transport for reasons relating to education, including escorting children to school
(26 per cent BAME compared with 15 per cent white). BAME Londoners are less
likely than white Londoners to use public transport during the week for leisure
purposes (18 per cent BAME compared with 26 per cent white); this may be
related to the younger age profile of BAME Londoners, as younger people tend to
make fewer leisure trips on weekdays [12].
Weekday journey purpose (2013/14) [12]
% All White BAME Black Asian Mixed Other
Base – all trips by (40,159) (27,071) (12,900) (4,492) (6,355) (1,245) (808)
Londoners
Shopping/personal 24 25 24 25 22 23 31
business
Usual workplace 20 20 20 17 25 9 12
Leisure 23 26 18 17 16 22 22
Education 19 15 26 26 24 32 26
Other work-related 8 9 6 8 4 7 6
Other 6 6 7 6 8 8 3
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Asian Londoners are the most likely of all ethnic groups to be making weekday
journeys to their usual workplace (25 per cent) and least likely to be making
journeys for leisure (16 per cent) [12].
Transport for London – Women 43

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Ticket types
Oyster pay as you go (PAYG) is the most common ticket type used by Londoners
on all types of public transport, regardless of ethnic group. Oyster PAYG is used by
a higher proportion of BAME Londoners than white Londoners. Sixty-five per cent
of BAME Londoners use Oyster PAYG, compared to 55 per cent of white
Londoners. This pattern is the same for Oyster season tickets, which are used by a
higher proportion of BAME Londoners than white Londoners (27 per cent for
BAME Londoners compared with 15 per cent for white Londoners) [32].
BAME Londoners are much less likely to use a Freedom Pass to travel on public
transport than white Londoners [32].
These findings are likely to be related to the younger age profile of BAME
Londoners.
Tickets and passes used on public transport (January 2015) [32]
%
Base: Public transport users:
All
(975)
White
(687)
BAME
(239)
Freedom Pass 21 29 7
Oyster PAYG 58 55 65
Oyster Season ticket 20 15 27
Contactless payment 16 16 17
Cash/single/return 10 10 12
Any other Travelcard 7 7 7
Oyster card
A slightly higher proportion of BAME Londoners hold an Oyster card than white
Londoners. Mixed Londoners are the least likely to hold an Oyster card (52 per
cent) [12].
Possession of an Oyster card (2013/14) [12]
% All White BAME Black Asian Mixed Other
Base (15,700) (10,044) (5,563) (1,903) (2,785) (488) (387)
Have an Oyster
60 59 61 61 63 52 62
card
Do not have an
Oyster card
40 41 39 39 37 48 38
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Note that Oyster card ownership excludes Freedom Passes, Oyster photocards and Zip cards.
Transport for London – Women 44

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Freedom Pass
Nineteen per cent of white Londoners have Freedom Passes compared with nine
per cent of BAME Londoners. These differences are largely linked to the differing
age profile of BAME and white Londoners. The proportion of BAME and white
Londoners aged 65 and over who hold a Freedom Pass is the same: 92 per cent of
both BAME and white Londoners aged 65 or over hold a Freedom Pass [12].
Freedom Passes held (2013/14) [12]
% All White BAME Black Asian Mixed Other
Base (15,700) (10,044) (5,563) (1,903) (2,785) (488) (387)
Older person’s
Freedom pass
15 19 9 8 10 3 8
Disabled person’s
Freedom pass
2 2 2 3 2 2 3
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Transport for London – Women 45

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Barriers
Barriers to greater public transport use
We have carried out several research programmes to investigate the barriers that
Londoners face when using public transport. The findings from each of these
studies are in general agreement. However, it is worth noting that the issue of
barriers is complex and the specific questions that Londoners were asked may
have had an impact upon the responses that people gave. The impact of specific
barriers may also be much more significant for some Londoners than others.
BAME Londoners cite a greater number of barriers to increased public transport
use than white Londoners. The barriers to greater public transport use that are
most commonly mentioned by BAME Londoners are overcrowded services (64 per
cent BAME compared with 56 per cent white), cost of tickets (53 per cent BAME
compared with 40 per cent white), slow journey times (50 per cent BAME
compared with 36 per cent white), and unreliable services (43 per cent BAME
compared with 33 per cent white) [14].
For all potential barriers put to Londoners (including concerns about antisocial
behaviour, fear of crime and a lack of information on how to use public transport)
a greater proportion of BAME Londoners than white Londoners cite these as
potentially stopping them from using public transport more often [14].
Barriers to using public transport more often (prompted) (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]
% All White BAME
Base (4,005) (3,039) (791)
Overcrowded services 59 56 64
Cost of tickets 45 40 53
Slow journey times 41 36 50
Unreliable services 37 33 43
Concern about antisocial behaviour 34 31 40
Dirty environment on the bus/train 28 21 39
Fear of crime getting to/ waiting for the
bus/train
24 19 32
Fear of crime on the bus/train 23 18 30
Fear about knife crime 20 16 27
Dirty environment getting to the bus/train 18 12 27
Fear of terrorist attacks 12 9 17
Graffiti 10 8 13
Lack of information on how to use public
transport
10 9 12
Risk of accidents 9 6 12
Don’t understand how to buy bus tickets 5 5 6
None of these 17 20 12
Transport for London – Women 46

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Safety and security
TfL uses a typology of worry to monitor the perceptions of Londoners with regard
to their personal security while using public transport in London. The typology
classifies people into:
Unworried – reports no general worry and no episodes of recent worry
Unexpressed fear – reports no general worry, but specific recent episodes
Anxious – reports general worry, but no specific recent episodes
Worried – reports general worry, and specific recent episodes
Don’t know
The majority of Londoners fall into the ‘unworried’ category which means that
they are generally unworried about their personal security in London and have
experienced no incidents to make them feel worried in the last three months. A
significantly lower proportion of BAME Londoners are considered ‘unworried’ than
white Londoners (70 per cent of BAME Londoners are ‘unworried’ compared with
80 per cent of white Londoners). As with many other findings in this report, this
may be related to the younger age profile of BAME Londoners [14].
Typology of worry (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]
% White BAME
Base (3,039) (791)
Unworried 80 70
Unexpressed 10 14
Anxious 4 8
Worried 4 7
Don’t know 2 2
Transport for London – Women 47

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
BAME Londoners are also considerably less likely than white Londoners to say
that they are ‘not at all worried’ about personal security while using public
transport in London (35 per cent BAME compared with 47 per cent white) and are
more likely to report that they are ‘very worried’ (four per cent BAME compared
with two per cent white) [14].
Levels of concern about personal security when using public transport in London (Jan/
Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]
% White BAME
Base (3,039) (791)
Not at all worried 47 35
A little bit worried 43 49
Quite a bit worried 7 10
Very worried 2 4
Don’t know 1 1
Among Londoners who are worried about their personal security when using
public transport in London, BAME Londoners are more likely than white
Londoners to say that this worry reduces their quality of life ‘very much’ (15 per
cent BAME Londoners experience this level of worry compared with 11 per cent
white Londoners) [14].
Extent to which worry about personal security when using public transport reduces quality
of life (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]
% White BAME
Base (all worried about personal safety) (301) (127)
Not at all 20 17
A little 30 28
Moderately 18 19
Quite a bit 19 20
Very much 11 15
Don’t know 2 -
Net: Quite a bit/very much 30 35
A slightly higher proportion of BAME Londoners than white Londoners take
precautions against crime when using public transport (40 per cent BAME
compared with 38 per cent white). The most common precaution for BAME
Londoners is to sit by other people, whereas for white Londoners it is to look after
their belongings. For BAME Londoners the next most common precaution is to
travel with someone else, while for white Londoners the second most common
precaution is to sit near other people [14].
Transport for London – Women 48

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Precautions taken (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]
% All White BAME
Base (all who take precautions) (1,507) (1,130) (322)
Sat near to other people 34 29 44
Looked after my belongings 29 36 18
Travelled with someone else 23 20 29
Travelled at a different time of day 16 13 21
Used a different route 15 11 22
Stayed aware/vigilant 15 15 15
Avoided using that transport type 12 11 15
Only took necessities with me 3 3 3
Carried a personal alarm 3 3 3
Note responses 2% or below among all Londoners not shown.
In terms of actual experiences, the proportion of BAME Londoners who have felt
worried about their personal security when using public transport in London in the
past three months is higher than white Londoners (20 per cent BAME compared
with 14 per cent white). There is little difference as to whether the last worrying
episode was during the day or at night between BAME and white Londoners: 38
per cent of the most recent worrying episodes mentioned by BAME Londoners
occurred during the day compared with 42 per cent of episodes mentioned by
white Londoners (this difference is not statistically significant) [14].
We asked those who have felt worried about their personal security when using
public transport in the last three months on which type of transport they
experienced this event. There is little difference in the proportion of worrying
events by transport type between BAME and white Londoners. Buses were the
most likely type of transport on which theses events occurred (52 per cent of
BAME Londoners who have felt worried in the last three months were on the bus)
[14].
Crime and antisocial behaviour concerns affect the frequency of travel on the
Tube, bus and National Rail ‘a little’ or ‘a lot’ for slightly more than half of
Londoners (53 per cent). BAME Londoners are affected to a greater extent than
white Londoners: 62 per cent of BAME Londoners report that the frequency with
which they use public transport is affected ‘a lot’ or ‘a little’ because of concerns
over crime or antisocial behaviour compared with 47 per cent of white Londoners
[14].
Transport for London – Women 49

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
A higher proportion of BAME Londoners are affected in terms of their public
transport travel frequency because of these concerns across all three forms of
transport (Tube, bus, National Rail) both during the day and at night [14].
Proportion of Londoners for whom concerns over crime/antisocial behaviour affect the
frequency of their public transport use ‘a lot/a little’ (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]
% All White BAME
Base (4,005) (3,039) (791)
Overall: During the day/after dark
Underground/buses/National Rail 53 48 62
During the day:
Underground/buses/National Rail 23 17 31
Underground 16 11 23
Buses 17 13 24
National Rail 11 8 15
After dark:
Underground/buses/National Rail 48 44 56
Underground 37 31 46
Buses 42 38 50
National Rail 29 26 36
We recently conducted a trial on the number 25 bus route which showed that
intervention can make customers feel safer. This intervention (which included
regular patrols on the route by the Safer Transport Team, by community officers
and Revenue Protection Inspectors) led to an increase in the proportion of
customers who felt ‘unworried’ when travelling on the route (87 per cent
compared with 77 per cent before the intervention). BAME customers were more
likely to feel ‘unworried’ than white customers as a result of the intervention (88
per cent BAME compared with 85 per cent white) [33]
Transport for London – Women 50

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Road traffic injuries
BAME Londoners are less likely than white Londoners to say that they feel safe
from road accidents when walking around London either during the day or at
night. Thirty-seven per cent of white Londoners compared to 31 per cent of BAME
Londoners consider themselves very safe from road accidents when walking
around London during the day, and 23 per cent of white Londoners compared to
20 per cent of BAME Londoners consider themselves very safe from road
accidents when walking around London at night [19].
Feelings of safety from road accidents when walking around London (2015) [19]
% All White BAME
Base (1,000) (731) (232)
During the day:
Very safe 34 37 31
Quite safe 51 50 54
Not very safe 9 9 11
Not at all safe 2 2 3
During the night:
Very safe 22 23 20
Quite safe 46 51 40
Not very safe 17 13 25
Not at all safe 8 6 11
Transport for London – Women 51

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Differences exist between ethnic groups in terms of injury rates from road traffic
accidents (this refers to injuries sustained by any road users, so it includes
pedestrians, cyclists and car occupants). For both children and adults, road traffic
injury rates are higher among black Londoners compared to white and Asian
Londoners. Black adults are 1.36 times more likely to be injured on the roads than
white adults and 1.32 times more likely to be injured than Asian adults. A similar
pattern is seen for children [31].
Average annual injury rates per 100,000 for all transportation types (2007–2011) [31]
Average rate/100,000 people White BAME
Adults 237 460
Children 84 154
There is some uncertainty as to why these differences in injury rates exist. Some of
the variation is thought to be explained by the association between injury rates
and deprivation. However, this explanation is not thought to account for all of the
variation seen, especially among black Londoners, where research from 2007
found the relationship between injury rates and deprivation to be unclear [31].
Child pedestrian injuries
BAME children, especially children from black backgrounds, are more likely than
white children to be injured or killed in road accidents in London [23]. Black boys in
particular have higher pedestrian injury rates than black girls [31].
Average annual pedestrian injury rates in London per 100,000 people (1996–2006) [31]
Average
Gender White Black Asian
rate/100,000 people
Age group
0-4 Boys 45 95 68
Girls 29 52 41
5-9 Boys 125 235 141
Girls 72 135 69
10-14 Boys 254 313 136
Girls 179 255 97
15-24 Boys/Men 144 164 84
Girls/Women 122 148 69
Transport for London – Women 52

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Customer satisfaction
Overall satisfaction
We measure overall satisfaction with various transport types in London on an 11-
point scale, with 10 representing extremely satisfied and zero representing
extremely dissatisfied. We then scale this up to 100.
We have standardised satisfaction ratings, which are shown in the table below.
This allows us to apply consistent analysis across a wide range of satisfaction
research.
Average rating Level of satisfaction
Under 50
Very low/weak/poor
50-54 Low/weak/poor
55-64
Fairly/relatively/quite
low/weak/poor
65-69 Fair/reasonable
70-79 Fairly/relatively/quite good
80-84 Good or fairly high
85-90 Very good or high
90+ Excellent or very high
All the transport types receive fairly good/high overall satisfaction mean ratings,
and this is true across all ethnic groups.
While still good, BAME Londoners give lower overall satisfaction ratings compared
to white Londoners. In general, older Londoners tend to be more satisfied with
public transport. The greater proportion of older white Londoners than older
BAME Londoners may explain some of the differential in ratings. However, for the
transport types where sufficient data exists, younger BAME respondents still
provide lower satisfaction ratings than younger white respondents, indicating that
there is more to the differences than just age.
In particular, BAME Londoners rate the Woolwich ferry, taxis, the Victoria coach
station and DaR lower than white Londoners [16].
Transport for London – Women 53

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Overall satisfaction with transport types – all customers (2014/15) [16]
Satisfaction score All White BAME Black Asian Mixed
(0-100)
Bus services
Base (14,155) (9,401) (4,622) (1,990) (1,840) (792)
Satisfaction score 85 86 83 83 83 83
Bus stations
Base (3,626) (1,850) (1,136) (509) (412) (215)
Satisfaction score 78 80 77 77 78 76
Night buses
Base (910) (550) (350) (169) (131) (50)
Satisfaction score 81 82 78 80 78 73
Underground
Base (17,634) (13,381) (4,186) (975) (2,101) (1,110)
Satisfaction score 84 85 83 82 83 83
Overground
Base (5,397) (3,531) (1,580) (558) (730) (292)
Satisfaction score 83 84 81 79 82 84
DLR
Base (13,398) (8,232) (4,563) (1,532) (1,995) (1,036)
Satisfaction score 89 89 88 87 88 87
Dial-a-Ride
Base (2,572) (1,937) (578) (218) (289) (71)
Satisfaction score 92 93 88 90 86 90
London River Services
Base (2,106) (1,787) (261) (35)* (111) (115)
Satisfaction score 90 90 89 - 87 90
Private Hire Vehicles
Base (439) (330) (102) (24)* (45)* (33)*
Satisfaction score 80 80 82 - - -
Taxis
Base (569) (449) (110) (17)* (58) (35)*
Satisfaction score 83 85 78 - 78 -
Trams
Base (4,329) (2,986) (1,175) (566) (406) (203)
Satisfaction score 89 90 88 88 89 88
Victoria Coach Station
Base (1,204) (911) (290) (113) (106) (71)
Satisfaction score 82 83 78 75 80 78
Woolwich Ferry
Base (1,056) (633) (349) (223) (90) (36)*
Satisfaction score 79 84 74 76 68 -
* Denotes small base size (data not shown in this report for base sizes of less than 50).
Transport for London – Women 54

Score out of 100
Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Bus
Overall, Londoners’ satisfaction with buses is fairly high at 85 out of 100. BAME
bus users are slightly less satisfied with the service overall compared to white
Londoners (83 out of 100 BAME; 86 out of 100 white). Satisfaction with buses has
seen a steady increase over time among both BAME and white Londoners [16].
Overall satisfaction with buses over time [16]
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
78 79 80 80 79 81 82 81 81 82 84 84 86
74 74 75 76 76 78 78 78 78 79 80 81 83
White customers
BAME customers
Transport for London – Women 55

Score out of 100
Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Satisfaction with value for money on buses, as with other types of transport, is
lower than overall satisfaction. BAME customers rate value for money slightly
lower than white customers (70 out of 100 BAME compared with 74 out of 100
white). Looking at the trend over time, satisfaction with value for money does
fluctuate, but the long-term trend is relatively flat [16].
Value for money satisfaction with buses over time [16]
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
79 78
73 73 72 74 75 75
76 74 71 73
69
72
69
71
70 69 70
68
64 64
73 74
67
70
White customers
BAME customers
Drivers of satisfaction
The main drivers of satisfaction with buses are similar for both BAME and white
customers and tend to relate to journey times, the ease of making the journey and
satisfaction with information on delays both at stops (more for white Londoners)
and on the bus (more for BAME Londoners). Satisfaction ratings given by BAME
customers are also likely to be driven by the time that they waited to catch the bus
[16].
Drivers of satisfaction for bus users [16]
White customers
Journey time
Ease of making journey
Satisfaction with info on delays at stop
Comfort inside the bus
Satisfaction with live bus info - TfL website
on tablet\laptop\PC
BAME customers
Ease of making journey
Time waited to catch bus
Journey time
Satisfaction with info on delays on bus
Comfort inside the bus
Transport for London – Women 56

Score out of 100
Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Tube
Overall satisfaction with the Tube is fairly high among all customers (84 out of
100). BAME Tube users are slightly less satisfied than white customers (83 out of
100 BAME compared with 85 out of 100 white) [16].
The long-term trend of overall satisfaction with the Tube has increased for both
BAME and white customers, but is still slightly lower overall for BAME customers
than for white customers [16].
Overall satisfaction with the Tube over time [16]
100
90
80
70
60
75 77 78 79 78 78
71 72 74 76
73 75
80 81 80 81
77 77 77 78
84 83 85
81 81 83
50
40
30
20
10
0
White customers BAME customers
Transport for London – Women 57

Score out of 100
Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Satisfaction with value for money on the Tube is fair/reasonable among customers
overall (69 out of 100). Levels of satisfaction with value for money on the Tube are
lower for BAME customers than white customers (66 out of 100 BAME compared
with 70 out of 100 white) [16].
Value for money satisfaction with the Tube over time [16]
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
63 64 63 62 62 63
66 68 66 64
61 62 61 62
60
62 64
66
63
58
67 68 70
63 64 66
White customers BAME customers
Transport for London – Women 58

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Drivers of satisfaction
The top three drivers of satisfaction with the Tube are ease of making journeys,
comfort on the journey and length of the journey. These top three reasons are the
same for BAME and white Londoners [16].
Drivers of satisfaction for Tube users [16]
White customers
Ease of making journey
Comfort of journey
Length of journey time
Length of time waiting for train
Train crowding
BAME customers
Ease of making journey
Comfort of journey
Length of journey time
Smoothness of journey
Personal safety on train
Overground
Overall satisfaction among all customers using the Overground is fairly high at 83
out of 100. Among BAME customers of the Overground, overall satisfaction is
slightly lower at 81 out of 100 [16].
Overall satisfaction with London Overground over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score All White BAME Black Asian Mixed
(0-100)
Base 2014/15 (5,397) (3,531) (1,580) (558) (730) (292)
2009/10 73 74 72 71 73 70
2010/11 80 82 79 78 78 80
2011/12 82 83 80 78 80 80
2012/13 82 83 80 79 81 79
2013/14 82 83 79 77 80 79
2014/15 83 84 81 79 82 84
Overall satisfaction with value for money on the Overground is 73 out of 100.
BAME Londoners are as satisfied as white Londoners (72 out of 100 white) [16].
Satisfaction with value for money with London Overground over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score All White BAME Black Asian Mixed
(0-100)
Base 2014/15 (5,182) (3,482) (1,575) (557) (730) (288)
2011/12 72 73 69 67 70 70
2012/13 71 79 69 69 71 65
2013/14 70 71 68 67 69 68
2014/15 73 72 73 73 73 74
Transport for London – Women 59

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Drivers of satisfaction
Ease of making a journey, the condition of trains and feeling valued as a customer
are the main drivers of satisfaction for white and BAME customers in relation to
overall satisfaction with London Overground.
Drivers of satisfaction for Overground users [16]
White customers
Ease of making journey
Condition and state of repair of the train
Feel valued as a customer
How well the information or assistance met
needs
Comfort of train
BAME customers
Condition and state of repair of the train
Ease of making your journey
Feel valued as a customer
General information about train times and
routes at the station
Information about service disruptions on the
train
Docklands Light Railway (DLR)
Overall satisfaction with the DLR is high among customers using the network at
89 out of 100. There is little difference between BAME and white users of the DLR
(88 out of 100 BAME compared to 89 out of 100 white) [16].
Overall satisfaction with DLR over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score All White BAME Black Asian Mixed
(0-100)
Base 2014/15 (13,398) (8,232) (4,563) (1,532) (1,995) (1,036)
2009/10 81 82 79 79 80 78
2010/11 81 83 80 80 79 81
2011/12 82 84 81 81 81 82
2012/13 87 87 86 85 87 86
2013/14 87 88 85 85 86 85
2014/15 89 89 88 87 88 87
Overall satisfaction with value for money on the DLR is quite good (77 out of 100),
but it is slightly lower for BAME customers than white customers (76 out of 100
BAME compared to 78 out of 100 white) [16].
Satisfaction with value for money with DLR over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score All White BAME Black Asian Mixed
(0-100)
Base 2014/15 (12,839) (8,060) (4,527) (1,510) (1,989) (1,028)
2011/12 72 74 70 70 70 70
2012/13 74 75 72 73 71 71
2013/14 75 76 73 74 74 70
2014/15 77 78 76 76 76 76
Transport for London – Women 60

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Drivers of satisfaction
Among both BAME and white DLR customers the drivers of satisfaction are very
similar. BAME customer satisfaction is slightly more related to feeling valued
rather than the length of time the journey took [16].
Drivers of satisfaction for DLR users [16]
White customers
Ease of making journey
Comfort inside the train
Length of time journey took
Reliability of trains
Feel valued as a customer
BAME customers
Ease of making journey
Comfort inside the train
Feel valued as a customer
Reliability of trains
Length of time you waited for the train
Trams
Overall satisfaction with trams is high among customers at 89 out of 100. This is
slightly lower among BAME users than white tram customers (88 out of 100 BAME
compared with 90 out of 100 white) [16].
Overall satisfaction with trams over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score All White BAME Black Asian Mixed
(0-100)
Base 2014/15 (4,329) (2,986) (1,175) (566) (406) (203)
2009/10 86 87 86 84 * *
2010/11 85 86 84 83 83 87
2011/12 86 87 84 83 84 *
2012/13 89 90 87 87 88 87
2013/14 89 90 88 88 89 89
2014/15 89 90 88 88 89 88
* Denotes small base size (percentages not shown in this report for base sizes of less than 50).
Overall satisfaction with value for money on the tram network is quite good (78
out of 100) but it is slightly lower for BAME customers than white customers (77
out of 100 BAME compared to 79 out of 100 white) [16].
Satisfaction with value for money with trams over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score All White BAME Black Asian Mixed
(0-100)
Base 2014/15 (2,824) (1,801) (1,002) (487) (337) (178)
2011/12 73 75 70 69 73 *
2012/13 77 79 75 77 73 73
2013/14 78 79 77 77 77 79
2014/15 78 79 77 77 77 77
* Denotes small base size (percentages not shown in this report for base sizes of less than 50).
Transport for London – Women 61

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Streets
There is little difference in the satisfaction ratings given by BAME and white
Londoners in terms of the use of London’s streets. Overall satisfaction with streets
and pavements is higher for people making a journey on foot than by car [34].
Overall satisfaction with streets and pavement after last journey over time – walking
journey [34]
Net fairly
All White BAME
satisfied/very
satisfied (%)
Base 2014/15 (957) (732) (184)
2011 64 61 74
2012 68 65 77
2013 69 67 75
2014 68 67 72
2015 68 69 69
Overall satisfaction with streets and pavements after last journey over time - car journey
[34]
Net fairly
All White BAME
satisfied/very
satisfied (%)
Base 2014/15 (830) (630) (163)
2011 54 52 61
2012 62 60 68
2013 57 54 65
2014 61 59 64
2015 60 60 61
Please note that satisfaction for streets is calculated as a combination of ‘very
satisfied’ and ‘fairly satisfied’ rather than the 11-point scale used for other
customer satisfaction survey (CSS) results [34].
Transport for London – Women 62

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Transport for London Road Network (TRLN)
Satisfaction with the TLRN is reasonable to fairly good. BAME users of the TLRN
give a score of 68 out of 100 for walking, 71 out of 100 for travelling by bus on red
routes and 66 out of 100 for driving. There are very few differences by ethnicity
[16].
Overall satisfaction – general impression of red routes over time [16]
Satisfaction score (0-100) All White BAME Black Asian Mixed
Walking
Base 2014-15 (1,254) (936) (318) (74) (130) (114)
2013/14 70 70 70 74 73 63
2014/15 68 68 68 65 71 65
Travelling by bus
Base 2014-15 (4,620) (3,392) (1,228) (396) (423) (409)
2013/14 69 69 72 74 71 69
2014/15 71 70 71 73 72 68
Driving
Base 2014-15 (3,605) (3,029) (576) (156) (253) (167)
2013/14 67 67 66 70 66 65
2014/15 67 67 66 70 65 63
Cycling
Base 2014-15 (1,838) (1,405) (433) (76) (195) (162)
2013/14 69 68 72 * * *
2014/15 70 70 72 75 74 66
* Denotes small base size (data not shown in this report for base sizes of less than 50).
Transport for London – Women 63

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Access to information
Information needs
For some BAME Londoners language can be a significant barrier to public
transport use, especially among people who were not born in the UK. While this is
less of an issue for familiar journeys, it can limit the extent to which people make
unfamiliar journeys [27].
Access to the internet
A higher proportion of BAME Londoners have access to the internet than white
Londoners (96 per cent BAME compared with 91 per cent white). This is almost
entirely due to the older age profile of white Londoners, as the proportion of
BAME and white Londoners aged between 16 and 64 who access the internet is
very similar (98 per cent BAME 16-64 year olds compared with 96 per cent white
16-64 year olds) [15].
Both BAME and white 16 to 64-year-old Londoners tend to access the internet in
similar places:
Ninety-four per cent of BAME and 95 per cent of white Londoners aged
between 16 and 64 access the internet at home
Sixty-eight per cent of BAME 16-64 year olds access the internet ‘on the move’
compared with 70 per cent of white Londoners of this age
Sixty-three per cent of BAME 16 to 64year olds access the internet at work,
which is slightly lower than the proportion of white Londoners in this age
group accessing the internet at work (66 per cent) [15]
Transport for London – Women 64

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Access to the internet among ethnic groups (Apr/ Oct 2014) [15]
% All White BAME White BAME White BAME
16-64 16-64 65+ 65+
Base (2,001) (1,483) (394) (932) (343) (551) (51)
Any access 92 91 96 96 98 66 49
Access at home 89 89 92 95 94 65 49
Access ‘on the
61 59 66 70 68 16 10
move’
Access at work 56 54 61 66 63 5 6
Across all ethnic groups in London there is a wide range of different uses for the
internet. While most uses of the internet are common across ethnic groups, there
are several differences in the proportion of Londoners in each ethnic group
undertaking specific tasks.
From our research of travel-related internet use, we found that the main
difference is in using the internet for day-to-day travel plans (61 per cent BAME
compared with 71 per cent white).
Transport for London – Women 65

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
Mobile device usage and online behaviour
BAME Londoners are more likely than white Londoners to use smartphones (90
per cent BAME compared with 71 per cent white). This pattern is evident even
when accounting for the younger average age of BAME Londoners compared to
white Londoners [15].
Proportion of Londoners who use a smartphone (iPhone, BlackBerry, Android, other)
(Apr/ Oct 2014) [15]
% Base Smartphone ownership
All Londoners (2,001) 77
White Londoners (1,483) 71
BAME Londoners (394) 90
16-24-year-old white
Londoners
16-24-year-old BAME
Londoners
16-64-year-old white
Londoners
16-64-year-old BAME
Londoners
(70) 94
(64) 100
(932) 82
(343) 92
65+-year-old white Londoners (551) 25
65+-year-old BAME Londoner (51) 27
Transport for London – Women 66

Black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) people
We have found a number of differences among BAME and white Londoners in
terms of the social media channels that they use:
A greater proportion of white than BAME Londoners use Facebook (80 per
cent BAME social media users compared with 85 per cent white)
A higher proportion of BAME than white Londoners use YouTube (44 per cent
BAME social media users compared with 38 per cent white)
A larger proportion of BAME than white Londoners use Instagram (31 per cent
BAME social media users compared with 17 per cent white)
More BAME Londoners use Google+ compared with white Londoners (17 per
cent BAME compared with 10 per cent white)
Use of Twitter is more even between BAME and white Londoners (32 per cent for
BAME compared with 33 per cent for White Londoners) [15].
Use of the TfL website
The proportion of both BAME and white Londoners who have used the TfL
website is very similar (80 per cent BAME compared to 79 per cent white).
However, when looking solely at 16-64year olds, slightly fewer BAME Londoners
access the TfL website than white Londoners (82 per cent BAME compared to 86
per cent white) [15].
Proportion of Londoners who visit www.tfl.gov.uk (Apr/ Oct 2014) [15]
% All White BAME
Base (2,001) (1,483) (394)
Any 78 79 80
Daily 10 9 12
Up to 3-4 times a week 21 21 22
Up to 3-4 times a month 20 23 16
About once a month 17 16 18
Less than once a month 11 11 12
Never 20 20 19
Don’t know/ refused 2 1 1
Accessing information in the event of travel disruption
The proportion of internet users stating that they obtain real-time travel
information from the TfL website is similar between BAME and white Londoners
(71 per cent BAME compared to 70 per cent white). Most other channels (such as
other websites, apps, and Twitter feeds) are used relatively evenly by both BAME
and white Londoners [15].
Transport for London – Women 67

Women
Summary: Women
Key findings
According to the 2011 Census, 51 per cent of Londoners are women [2]
Women tend to complete more weekday trips on average than men (2.8 for women
compared to 2.6 for men) [12]
Walking is the most commonly used type of transport by women (96 per cent walk at
least once a week). Women are more likely to use buses than men (65 per cent women
compared with 58 per cent men), but are less likely to use other types of transport
including the Tube (35 per cent women compared with 42 per cent men) [12]
Women are more likely than men to be travelling with buggies and/or shopping, and
this can affect transport choices [35]
Satisfaction with transport among women and men is very similar and is mainly driven
by the ease of making the journey [16]
Women are more likely than men to experience episodes of worry when travelling on
public transport and this is more likely to reduce their frequency of travel than for men
[14]
Use of the TfL website is equally high among women and men (both 78 per cent) [15]
We recognise that there may be barriers to transport faced by some transgender
women and men. However, we do not yet have sufficient data to provide a detailed
analysis
Transport for London – Women 68

Women
Profile of women in London
In line with the rest of England and the UK, 51 per cent of Londoners are women.
There is little variation across the London boroughs in terms of the split between
women and men; only the City of London, Newham and Tower Hamlets see any
sizeable difference from the average across the Capital (45 per cent of City of
London residents and 48 per cent of Newham and Tower Hamlets residents are
women) [2].
The key demographic differences between women and men are employment
status and household income. Thirty-eight per cent of women are not working or
are retired, with a further 15 per cent employed part-time (compared to 24 per
cent and seven per cent of men respectively) [12]. Women are also more likely to
be the primary carer of children at home. Both of these factors appear to influence
the travel behaviour and attitudes of women in London.
Transport behaviour
Women make a greater number of journeys per weekday than men. Trips made by women
tend to be shorter [12].
Women are more likely than men to use the bus at least once a week (65 per
cent of women do so, compared with 58 per cent of men) and are less likely to
travel by Tube at least once a week (35 per cent of women compared with 42
per cent of men) [12]. Women are also less likely to ever cycle in London (10
per cent of women compared with 16 per cent men) [17]
Women are less likely to drive at least once a week (35 per cent of women do
so compared with 44 per cent of men). However, they are more likely to be a
car passenger (55 per cent compared with 42 per cent of men) [12]
Women are less likely to be employed full or part-time, and this is reflected in
the smaller proportion of journeys that are made by women for work purposes
than men (22 per cent compared with 34 per cent of journeys made by men). A
higher proportion of journeys made by women are for shopping/personal
business (27 per cent of women’s journeys compared with 21 per cent of
journeys made by men) [12]
Women are equally likely as men to use Oyster PAYG to travel around London
(59 per cent of women compared with 58 per cent of men) [32]
Transport for London – Women 69

Women
Barriers
The reasons that men and women give as barriers to using public transport are
often similar. The most commonly mentioned barriers for both women and men
are overcrowded services and the cost of tickets. There are some differences,
however, particularly around fear of crime where women are more likely to
experience barriers [14].
Personal safety is a concern for some women. While 81 per cent of men are
considered to be ‘unworried’ according to our typology of worry on public
transport, only 70 per cent of women are considered ‘unworried’. Likewise, seven
per cent of women are considered ‘worried’ compared with four per cent of men
[14].
Women are more likely than men to take precautions against crime when
using public transport (42 per cent of women compared with per cent of men)
[14]
The most common precaution taken by women is to sit next to other people
(39 per cent of women who take precautions when travelling on public
transport do this). Travelling with someone else and looking after their
belongings are the other main precautions taken by women (both 28 per cent)
[14]
Concerns around crime and antisocial behaviour also have an impact upon
women’s frequency of public transport use: 61 per cent report that the
frequency with which they travel is affected ‘a lot’ or ‘a little’ because of these
concerns, compared with 43 per cent of men [14]
Women (of all ages) are less likely to use unbooked minicabs, with 13 per cent
claiming they are likely to do so in future compared to 26 per cent of men [36]
Among Londoners who are willing to answer the question, 11 per cent of
women report experiencing some form of unwanted sexual behaviour while
travelling in London in the previous year (the equivalent figure for men is two
per cent) [14]
Customer satisfaction
Women are generally satisfied with public transport in London and report very
similar satisfaction levels to men [16].
Among women using the bus, overall satisfaction is fairly high (85 out of 100)
and is mainly linked to the ease of making a journey and journey time
Overall satisfaction with the Tube is also fairly high at 85 out of 100. This is
linked to the ease of making journeys, comfort and journey time issues
Overall satisfaction with both the Tube and bus has increased significantly
from 2002/03 to 2014/15. Satisfaction among women who use the bus has
increased from 76 to 85 out of 100 and for the Tube from 75 to 85 [16]
Transport for London – Women 70

Women
Access to information
Use of the TfL website is high among women and men (both 78 per cent) [15]
For both women and men, the main reason for using the TfL website is to use
Journey Planner. However, women are significantly more likely to use it than
men (71 per cent women compared with 62 per cent men). Women are less
likely to make use of live travel updates (27 per cent women compared with 34
per cent men) [37]
Transport for London – Women 71

Women
Introduction
In line with the demographic profile of the UK in general, women make up 51 per
cent of the London population [2]. On the whole, women and men have similar
experiences and requirements from the transport network. However, there are
some key differences, particularly relating to age, employment status and safety
and security issues.
TfL’s Single Equality Scheme addresses many of the issues that we have identified
in the research presented in this document. We have introduced a number of
initiatives, such as the ‘Safer Travel at Night’ scheme, which aims to increase
awareness of the risks posed by using unbooked minicabs [22].
This chapter focuses on the transport issues that are relevant to women in
London. It is important to note that the differences highlighted between women
and men in this chapter may well be influenced by a number of factors other than
gender, with age, income, working status and education all affecting perceptions
towards travel in London and travel behaviour.
Transport for London – Women 72

Women
Profile of women in London
Fifty-one per cent of Londoners are women, which is the same split as across
England as a whole [2].
Gender profile of Londoners 2011 Census [2]
% Proportion of Londoners
Men 49
Women 51
London has a much younger age profile than England as a whole, with 52 per cent
of the London population aged under 34, compared to 44 per cent across England.
This younger age profile is seen for both women and men [2].
Age profile of women and men in London and England (2011) [2]
% of total London/England
population
Age groups All Men Women
London
0-34 52 26 26
35-54 28 14 14
55+ 20 9 11
England
0-34 44 22 22
35-54 28 14 14
55+ 28 13 15
Base size not shown, as data are based on ONS Census data.
Transport for London – Women 73

Women
Women and men make up a roughly equal proportion of each age group until
around 80 years of age. Londoners over 80 are much more likely to be women
than men (see population pyramid) [2].
2014
9 0-4
80+
75-
70- 79
65- 74
60-
0-4 69
55-
0-4
64
0-4
50- 59
45-
0-4 54
0-4
40- 49
0-4 35-39 44
0-4 30-
25- 34
20- 29
0-4
15- 24
0-4
10- 19
0-4 14 5-
0-4
10-14
10-14
10-14
10-14
10-14
10-14
Reflecting the fact that more older Londoners are women than men, women are
marginally more likely than men to be disabled (11 per cent of London’s women
are disabled, compared with nine per cent for London’s men, and 56 per cent of
disabled Londoners are women). Similarly, women are more likely than men to be
retired (17 per cent of women are retired compared with 13 per cent of men, and
58 per cent of retired Londoners are women) [12].
Within this document there are two main sources of demographic data: the Office
for National Statistics Census and the London Travel Demand Survey. The
following table shows the demographic breakdown of Londoners recorded in the
LTDS.
Transport for London – Women 74

Women
LTDS demographic profile of women and men in London (2013/14) [12]
% Men Women Proportion of
category that are
women
Base (7,518) (8,182) (varies)
Age
5-10 8 8 48
11-15 6 6 48
16-24 14 14 50
25-59 55 55 50
60-64 5 5 52
65-70 5 5 52
71-80 4 5 57
81+ 2 3 59
Ethnicity
White 62 62 51
BAME 37 37 51
Household income
Less than £10,000 15 20 58
£10,000–£19,999 17 20 54
£20,000–£34,999 20 19 50
£35,000–£49,999 14 13 49
£50,000–£74,999 16 14 47
£75,000+ 18 14 46
Working status*
Working full-time 58 36 39
Working part-time 7 15 70
Student 11 10 50
Retired 13 17 58
Not working 11 21 68
Disabled
Yes 10 12 56
No 90 88 50
Impairment affects travel
Yes 8 11 57
No 92 89 50
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five and working status does not include under 16s. All TfL surveys use the
Equality Act 2010 to define disabled people as those who define themselves as having a long-term physical or mental disability or health issue
that impacts on their daily activities, the work they can do, or limits their ability to travel.
Transport for London – Women 75

Women
The proportion of Londoners who are white and who are BAME is very similar for
women and men. However, looking at specific ethnic groups in London, there are
some differences by gender. For example, 51 per cent of white Londoners are
women compared to 43 per cent of Arab Londoners [2].
Proportion of women living in London by detailed ethnic group [2]
Ethnic group
% Women
All 51
White: Total 51
English/Welsh/Scottish/Northern Irish/British 50
Irish 52
Gypsy or Irish Traveller 52
Other white 52
Mixed/multiple ethnic group: Total 51
White and black Caribbean 52
White and black African 51
White and Asian 49
Other mixed 52
Asian/Asian British: Total 50
Indian 49
Pakistani 47
Bangladeshi 49
Chinese 54
Other Asian 51
Black/African/Caribbean/black British: Total 53
African 53
Caribbean 56
Other black 50
Other ethnic group: Total 47
Arab 43
Any other ethnic group 49
Transport for London – Women 76

Women
Employment and income
Differences exist between women and men in terms of employment and
household income. Higher proportions of women say that they are currently not
employed (21 per cent of women compared with 11 per cent of men) and 68 per
cent of Londoners aged 16 or over and not employed are women. More women
than men are employed part-time (12 per cent of women compared with five per
cent of of men) and 70 per cent of Londoners working part-time are women [12].
Women are more likely than men to have a low household income. Forty per cent
of women have an income of less than £20,000 per year compared with 32 per
cent of men. This may be linked to the higher proportion of women being in parttime
employment, retired or not working [12].
Women get paid less than men on average. The median salary in 2013 for a
woman in London was £25,411 compared with £35,894 for men. This is due in part
to the increased number of part-time positions occupied by women. Women
occupy 71 per cent of part-time positions in the Capital. However, even when
looking solely at full-time salaries there is still a discrepancy in the average annual
pay for women and men; the median full-time annual pay for a woman in London
is £31,100, compared to £38,606 for a man [38].
The employment rate of women is affected by child dependency. Employment
rates (noted in 2010) decline steadily from 78 per cent of women with no
dependent children to 22 per cent of women with four or more dependent children
[39]. These family commitments also change the way in which women use public
transport, affecting their travel patterns and behaviour.
London boroughs
We found few differences in the split between women and men across London’s
boroughs. The City of London has the lowest proportion of women; within the City
only 45 per cent of residents are women. Newham and Tower Hamlets also have a
lower than average proportion of women, both with 48 per cent. All other
boroughs lie within two percentage points of the London average [2].
Transport for London – Women 77

Women
Travel behaviour
On average, women in London take a greater number of trips on a weekday than
men (2.8 women compared with 2.6 men) [12].
The difference in the number of trips made by women and men changes with age.
Women aged 65 and older take as many trips as men of the same age [12].
Average number of weekday trips (2013/14) [12]
Age groups Men Women Difference
All 2.6 2.8 0.2
Under 16s 2.3 2.4 0.1
16-24 2.3 2.5 0.2
25-64 2.7 3.1 0.4
65+ 2.3 2.3 -
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,
3,329;; 65+,996.
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Transport types used
The three most common transport types used by women at least once a week are
walking (96 per cent), bus (65 per cent) and car as a passenger (55 per cent). The
most common transport types used at least once a week by men are also walking
(97 per cent) and bus (58 per cent). However, the third most commonly used type
of transport for men is the car as a driver (44 per cent) rather than as a passenger
(42 per cent), or the Tube (42 per cent) [12].
There are some marked differences in the types of transport that women and men
living in London use at least once a week. Women are more likely than men to
travel by bus at least once a week (65 per cent of women compared with 58 per
cent of men), which is a pattern that we see across age groups.
Eighty-two per cent of women aged 16-24 use the bus at least once a week
compared with 77 per cent of men
Although the proportion of women and men aged 65 and over that use the bus
at least once a week is relatively similar (63 per cent of women compared to 60
per cent of men) the higher number of women in this age group increases the
proportion of bus users that are women aged 65 or over [12]
Women living in London are less likely than men to use the Tube at least once a
week (35 per cent women compared with 42 per cent men). This is mainly driven
by the reduced use of the Tube by older women. Women aged 65 and over are
considerably less likely to use the Tube at least once a week than men of the same
age group (19 per cent women compared with 29 per cent of men) [12].
Transport for London – Women 78

Women
Women aged 17 or over who are living in London are less likely than men to have a
full driving licence (56 per cent of women aged 17 or over compared with 72 per
cent of men aged 17 or over) or have access to a car (65 per cent of all women
compared with 69 per cent of all men). These factors are likely to be related to the
frequency of car use as a driver that we have observed. Women are more likely to
travel by car at least once a week as a passenger than men (55 per cent of women
compared with 42 per cent of men) and in turn are less likely to travel by car as a
driver at least once a week than men (35 per cent of women compared with 44 per
cent of men) [12].
The likelihood of using a number of modes of transport is very similar between
women and men. This includes the likelihood of walking (96 per cent of women
compared with 97 per cent of men), use of the Overground (eight per cent of
women compared with ten per cent of men), the DLR (four per cent of women
compared with five per cent of men), black cabs (four per cent of women
compared with six per cent of men), minicabs (both six per cent) and the tram
(both two per cent) [12].
Proportion of Londoners using types of transport at least once a week (2013/14) [12]
% Men Women 16-24 25-64 65+
M W M W M W
Walking 97 96 98 98 97 97 89 84
Bus 58 65 77 82 52 61 60 63
Car (as a driver) 44 35 19 15 59 47 59 34
Tube 42 35 51 53 50 39 29 19
Car (as a passenger) 42 55 54 55 32 49 32 54
National Rail 19 15 22 20 24 17 14 10
Overground 10 8 11 13 12 10 5 3
London taxi/black cab 6 4 4 4 7 5 3 3
Other taxi/minicab (PHV) 6 6 7 9 7 6 5 6
DLR 5 4 8 6 6 4 2 1
Motorbike 2 - 1 - 3 - 1 -
Tram (London Tramlink) 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 1
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,
4,730; women 65+, 1,359.
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Where there is more detailed information on individual types of transport, we
have included a sub-section below.
Transport for London – Women 79

Women
Walking
Ninety-six per cent of women walk at least once a week and 83 per cent walk five
or more days a week. Walking frequency is very similar for women and men [12].
Frequency of walking (2013/14) [12]
% Men Women
Base (7,518) (8,182)
5 or more days a week 83 83
3 or 4 days a week 6 6
2 days a week 4 4
1 day a week 3 3
At least once a fortnight 1 1
At least once a month 1 1
At least once a year 1 1
Not used in last year 1 2
Never used - -
*Note that LTDS in this report data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Women are more likely than men to walk a child to school at least once a week (21
per cent compared with 15 per cent of men) and less likely than men to walk as
part of a longer journey at least once a week (73 per cent of women compared to
80 per cent of men). Women are also less likely than men to visit
pubs/restaurants/cinemas and other social places on foot at least once a week (45
per cent of women compared to 61 per cent of men) [19].
Walking at least once a week by purpose of journey (2015) [19]
% who walk at least once a week Men Women
Base (418) (582)
Walk…
To complete small errands such as getting a newspaper 85 87
or posting a letter
As part of a longer journey 80 73
To get to work/school/college 52 52
To visit friends and relatives 50 48
To visit pubs/restaurants/cinemas and other social
61 45
places
To take a child to school 15 21
Transport for London – Women 80

Women
Bus
The bus is the second most frequently used type of transport (after walking)
among women with almost two thirds (65 per cent) using the bus at least once a
week. This is higher than among men where 58 per cent use the bus at least once a
week [12].
Frequency of travelling by bus (2013/14) [12]
% Men Women
Base (7,518) (8,182)
5 or more days a week 27 30
3 or 4 days a week 11 14
2 days a week 10 12
1 day a week 10 9
At least once a fortnight 6 5
At least once a month 11 9
At least once a year 15 13
Not used in last year 8 7
Never used 3 2
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
The most recent bus user research shows that daytime bus use among women is
higher than that of men (57 per cent of bus users are women and 43 per cent are
men). On night buses however, the majority of customers are men (64 per cent are
men and 36 per cent are women) [28]. This may reflect concerns that women have
about travelling on buses at night. Women are also less likely than men to travel at
night for work [14].
Comparison of day and night bus users (2014) [28]
%
Base
Men
(21,084)
Women
(23,622)
Men
16-24
(5,093)
Women
16-24
(5,957)
Men
25+
(15,991)
Women
25+
(17,665)
Day bus users 43 57 22 23 78 77
Night bus users 64 36 30 41 70 59
Transport for London – Women 81

Women
Work is the main purpose of travelling by bus among men and women, although
even more so for men. Of women travelling by bus during the day, 13 per cent are
travelling to or from shopping (this compares to 8 per cent of men)[28].
Purpose of bus journey by gender and time of day (2014) [28]
During the day
At night
% Men Women Men Women
Base (14,982) (19,815) (5,525) (3,036)
To/from or for work 58 51 56 46
To/from shopping 8 13 1 2
Visiting friends/relatives 9 9 13 14
To/from school/education 8 9 4 4
Leisure 10 9 18 26
Personal business 5 5 2 2
Other purpose 3 3 5 6
Car
Women are more likely to have travelled as a car passenger than a driver in the last
week. Fifty-five per cent of women travel as a passenger compared with 35 per
cent travelling as a driver. These proportions are reversed for men, where 44 per
cent travel as the driver and 42 per cent as a passenger [12].
Fifty-six per cent of women aged 17 or over hold a full driving licence, a lower
proportion than among men (72 per cent of men hold a driving licence). The
proportion of Londoners who hold a driving licence is highest among people in
younger age groups, and decreases as age increases [12].
Proportion of Londoners aged 16 or over with a full car driving licence (2013/14) [12]
% Men Women
Base (6,185) (6,942)
Holds a full car driving licence 72 56
Women are less likely than men to have household access to a car. Thirty-six per
cent of women do not have access to a car compared with 33 per cent of men [12].
*Note that data above excludes under 16s.
Transport for London – Women 82

Women
Proportion of Londoners in a household with access to a car (2013/14) [12]
% Men Women
Base (7,518) (8,182)
0 cars 33 36
1 car 46 45
2+ cars 21 19
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Tube
Thirty-five per cent of women use the Underground at least once a week; a
significantly smaller figure than men at 42 per cent. Men are also more likely than
women to use the Tube on a daily basis [12].
Frequency of travelling by Tube (2013/14) [12]
% Men Women
Base (7,518) (8,182)
5 or more days a week 18 13
3 or 4 days a week 7 6
2 days a week 8 7
1 day a week 9 9
At least once a fortnight 8 8
At least once a month 14 15
At least once a year 24 26
Not used in last year 10 12
Never used 3 3
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Transport for London – Women 83

Women
Cycling
Women are less likely to cycle than men: 21 per cent of men cycle in London
compared with 14 per cent of women [17].
Ten per cent of women cycle regularly (at least once a week) in London and a
further four per cent cycle occasionally, with the remaining 86 per cent never using
bikes as a way of getting around the Capital. [17].
Proportion of Londoners who cycle (November 2014) [17]
% Men Women
Base (1,003) (1,189)
Cyclist (sometimes uses a bike to get
around London)
Non-cyclist (never uses a bike to get
around London)
21 14
79 86
Men travel by bicycle more frequently than women (16 per cent of men compared
with 10 per cent of women use a bicycle at least once a week) [17].
Frequency of travelling by bicycle (November 2014) [17]
% Men Women
Base (1,003) (1,189)
5 or more days a week 4 3
3 or 4 days a week 6 3
2 days a week 4 2
1 day a week 2 2
At least once a fortnight 2 1
At least once a month 1 1
At least once a year 2 2
Not used in last year - -
Never used 79 86
Women are also less likely than men to be able to ride a bike. Seventy-nine per
cent of women living in London can ride a bike, compared with 88 per cent of men
[17].
Proportion of Londoners able to ride a bike (November 2014) [17]
% Men Women
Base (1,003) (1,189)
Can ride a bike 88 79
Cannot ride a bike 12 21
Transport for London – Women 84

Women
We have developed a behavioural change model to look at Londoners’ readiness
to cycle or cycle more. Sixty-nine per cent of Londoners classified themselves as
being in the pre-contemplation category (defined in the table). Women show a
higher level of pre-contemplation about cycling than men (74 per cent of women
are in this category compared with 64 per cent of men) [17].
Thirteen per cent of men compared with eight per cent of women are classified as
being in the ‘sustained change’ category, meaning that they started cycling or
cycling more a while ago and are still doing it occasionally or regularly [17].
Behaviour change model of cycling (November 2014) [17]
% Men Women
Base (all) (1,003) (1,189)
Pre-contemplation
‘You have never thought about it, but would be unlikely to start in the future’ 64 74
‘You have thought about it, but don’t intend starting in the future’
‘You have never thought about it, but could be open to it in the future’
Contemplation
‘You are thinking about starting soon’ 10 9
Preparation
‘You have decided to start soon’ 4 2
Change
‘You have tried to start recently, but are finding it difficult’
2 2
‘You have started recently and are finding it quite easy so far’
Sustained change
‘You started a while ago and are still doing it occasionally’
13 8
‘You started a while ago and are still doing it regularly’
Lapsed
‘You had started doing this but couldn’t stick to it’ 6 6
Transport for London – Women 85

Women
Cycling schemes
A larger proportion of men than women have used Cycle Hire (15 per cent of
women have used the scheme compared with 19 per cent of men) [17].
Twenty-nine per cent of casual Cycle Hire users (defined as not having a Cycle Hire
key) are women and 23 per cent of members are women [58].
Among Londoners, a similar proportion of women and men say they intend to use
the scheme in the next year (25 per cent of women compared with 30 per cent of
men) [17].
Expected use of Cycle Hire in the future (November 2014) [17]
% Men Women
Base (536) (644)
Yes, definitely/ probably 30 25
Yes, definitely 10 8
Yes, probably 20 16
No, probably not 31 28
No, definitely not 30 36
Not sure 9 12
For both women and men, levels of awareness of Cycle Superhighways are lower
than for Cycle Hire. As with Cycle Hire, men are more likely than women to be
aware; fifty-three per cent of women are aware of Cycle Superhighways compared
to 70 per cent of men. We also observed a similar pattern with usage: 14 per cent
of men have used a Cycle Superhighway compared with seven per cent of women
[17].
Anticipated use of Cycle Superhighways among Londoners is lower than for Cycle
Hire: 17 per cent of women and 29 per cent of men say that they are definitely/
probably likely to use the Superhighways in the future [17].
Expected use of Cycle Superhighways (November 2014) [17]
% Men Women
Base (536) (644)
Yes, definitely/ probably 29 17
Yes, definitely 8 5
Yes, probably 21 13
No, probably not 30 26
No, definitely not 26 37
Not sure 15 19
Transport for London – Women 86

Women
Dial-a-Ride
Dial-a-Ride members are more likely to be women than men. Seventy-four per
cent of Dial-a-Ride members are women and this proportion increases with age
[30]. The 2011 Census also shows that disabled Londoners are more likely to be
women than men and that the proportion of women tends to increase with age.
However, this does not happen to the same extent as the profile of Dial-a-Ride
members [2].
Dial-a-Ride (DaR) membership by gender (2014) [2, 30]
% All disabled
DaR members
Londoners
Base (excludes unknown data) - (41,639)
Men 45 26
Women 55 74
Gender splits of Dial-a-Ride membership by age (2014) [2, 30] 2
All disabled London
residents
All DaR members (%)
(2011 Census %)
Age Men Women Men Women
Base - - (11,031) (30,608)
Under 18 58 42 63 37
18-34 49 51 47 53
35-49 48 52 38 62
50-64 47 53 35 65
65-79 45 55 28 72
80-89 34 66 23 77
90+ 23 77 21 79
2 Where data does not add up to 100 per cent, this is due to respondents not disclosing their gender.
Transport for London – Women 87

Women
Journey purpose
Weekday journey purpose varies between women and men in London. Women are
less likely to be travelling for work than men (17 per cent of women compared with
23 per cent of men). This may be linked to the higher proportion of women who
are economically inactive.
A greater proportion of journeys by women are for the purposes of
shopping/personal business which accounts for 27 per cent of weekday journeys
(compared with 21 per cent of those made by men). Women are also more likely
than men to be making trips for education, which includes taking children to
school (21 per cent of women compared with 16 per cent of men) [12].
Weekday journey purpose (2013/14) [12]
% Men Women
Base – all trips by Londoners
Shopping/personal business 21 27
Leisure 23 23
Education 16 21
Usual workplace 23 17
Other work-related 11 5
Other 6 7
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Transport for London – Women 88

Women
Ticket types
There is little difference between how women and men use tickets and passes
when travelling on public transport. For instance, women and men are just as
likely to use Oyster PAYG on public transport (59 per cent of women compared
with 58 per cent of men), which is by far the most popular payment method.
Similarly, there is little difference between the use of other tickets and passes ong
men and women [32].
Tickets and passes used on public transport (January 2015) [32]
% Men Women
Base: Public transport users: (378) (597)
Oyster PAYG 58 59
Oyster Season ticket 19 21
Contactless payment 15 17
Cash/single/return 11 9
Any other Travelcard 7 8
Freedom Pass 21 21
Travelcards
Sixty per cent of women have an Oyster card, which is in line with the proportion
of men who possess one (59 per cent) [12].
Ticket types held (2013/14) [12]
% Men Women
Base (7,518) (8,182)
Oyster card 59 60
Older person’s Freedom Pass 14 17
Disabled person’s Freedom Pass 2 2
Staff/police pass 2 1
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
A slightly greater proportion of women than men hold an older person’s Freedom
Pass (17 per cent of women compared with 14 per cent of men). The same
proportion of women and men hold a disabled person’s Freedom Pass (two per
cent each) [12].
Transport for London – Women 89

Women
Barriers
Barriers to greater public transport use
There are a number of potential barriers that can prevent Londoners from using
public transport more frequently. When presented with a list of these, women are
more likely than men to say that at least one issue prevents them from increasing
their use of public transport (84 per cent of women compared with 81 per cent of
men mention at least one barrier) [14].
The most commonly cited barrier for women and men is overcrowding on
transport services, which is a bigger issue for women (60 per cent of women
compared with 56 per cent of men). The second most common barrier relates to
the cost of tickets, which is also a bigger issue for women than men (47 per cent of
women compared with 43 per cent of men) [14].
Women are more likely than men to mention barriers relating to crime and
personal safety. In particular, they are more inclined to say that each of the
following prevents them from using public transport more:
Fear of crime on the bus/train and getting to the bus/train
Concern about antisocial behaviour
Concern about knife crime
Fear of terrorist attacks
Risk of accidents [14]
Barriers to using public transport more often (prompted) (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]
% Men Women
Base (1,619) (2,386)
Overcrowded services 56 60
Cost of tickets 43 47
Slow journey times 40 41
Unreliable services 34 39
Concern about antisocial behaviour 30 38
Dirty environment on the bus/train 25 30
Fear of crime getting to/ waiting for the bus/train 17 30
Fear of crime on the bus/train 16 28
Concern about knife crime 16 24
Dirty environment getting to the bus/train 16 20
Fear of terrorist attacks 8 16
Risk of accidents 5 12
Lack of information on how to use public transport 9 11
Graffiti 10 10
Don’t understand how to buy bus tickets 4 6
None of these 19 16
Transport for London – Women 90

Women
Women are more likely than men to be travelling with buggies and/or shopping,
and to be travelling with children. For this reason, the car is often seen as a
convenient type of transport, presenting less of a challenge to travelling when
laden down. However, our qualitative research indicates that the cost and stress
associated with driving encourages some people to use public transport –
particularly the bus, which is perceived to be more child-friendly and educational
than other types of transport such as the Tube [35].
Tube
Presently people make only a small number of trips on the Tube with buggies. We
assume that people are put off because of accessibility issues [40]. In research that
we carried out in 2012 with people travelling with restricted mobility (PRM), we
found that not all disabled customers or customers travelling with children 3 or
luggage made use of lifts available in Underground stations. Forty-eight per cent
of women travelling with children planned their journey with access to a lift in
mind, significantly higher than the PRM sample overall (29 per cent). When we
asked people to rank the Tube for accessibility on a scale of 0–10, 28 per cent of
women travelling as a PRM ranked it good to excellent (8-10), consistent with the
overall result (29 per cent) [41].
Bus
Travelling by bus with a buggy and/or children is often stressful for women and
presents potential issues with other passengers and drivers. Some buggy users
make use of the wheelchair priority area on buses. We have conducted research
around this area in recent years as part of a communications programme relating
to the use of this space [BP, 43].
3 Travelling with children is defined as those travelling with children aged under five or with
a pram/buggy [38].
Transport for London – Women 91

Women
Case study: Travelling with buggies on the bus 4
Travelling with children and buggies can present a stressful challenge at times for women.
The experience of people travelling with buggies on the bus depends on a number of
factors: how frequently they do so, the time of travel (and therefore how crowded the bus
is), the bus design, the age of the child/children and the number of children travelling in the
group [BP, 43].
Many customers have experienced difficulties when travelling with buggies on the bus.
These difficulties include crowding on buses, negative attitudes of other passengers,
negotiating getting on and off the bus and drivers refusing to allow buggies on the bus [43].
Additionally, women travelling with buggies mention practical issues that can be
problematic, such as moving the buggy around the pole to reach the wheelchair priority
area, and drivers parking too far away from the kerb [44].
‘I feel guilty standing there with the child in the pram. I’m always apologising, getting the
pram, pulling it over to let people go past…I just feel like I shouldn’t be on [the bus]. I feel
like it is a hindrance.’ (Woman, buggy user) [42]
Buggy users’ concerns and anxieties [43]
In terms of the travel experiences of buggy users, customers reported that inconsistent
experiences surrounding the space and driver approaches are the major cause of stress for
buggy and wheelchair users, and recommended clarification on 'the rules' for all customers
and drivers [43]. This feedback helped to inform the information campaign that we
launched.
4 We have included more information in the disabled customer chapter about the experiences of wheelchair
users.
Transport for London – Women 92

Women
Safety and security
We use a typology of worry to monitor the perceptions of Londoners with regard
to their personal security while using public transport in London. The typology
classifies people into:
Unworried – reports no general worry and no episodes of recent worry
Unexpressed fear – reports no general worry, but specific recent episodes
Anxious – reports general worry, but no specific recent episodes
Worried – reports general worry, and specific recent episodes
Don’t know
The majority of Londoners fall into the ‘unworried’ category, which means that
they are generally unworried about their personal security in London and have
experienced no incidents that made them feel worried in the last three months.
However, a significantly lower proportion of London’s women are considered
‘unworried’ than men (70 per cent of women are ‘unworried’ compared with 81 per
cent of men) [14].
Typology of worry (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]
% Men Women
Base (1,619) (2,386)
Unworried 81 70
Unexpressed 10 12
Anxious 3 8
Worried 4 7
Don’t know 2 3
Women living in London are considerably less likely than men to say that they are
‘not at all worried’ about personal security while using public transport. They are
also more likely to report that they are ‘very worried’ [14].
Levels of concern about personal security when using public transport in London (Jan/
Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]
% Men Women
Base (1,619) (2,386)
Not at all worried 51 34
A little bit worried 41 48
Quite a bit worried 5 12
Very worried 2 4
Don’t know 1 2
Transport for London – Women 93

Women
A higher proportion of women than men take precautions against crime when
using public transport (42 per cent of women compared with 35 per cent of men).
The most common precaution for women is to sit by other people (39 per cent),
whereas for men it is to look after their belongings (31 per cent). For women, the
next most common precautions are to travel with someone else and to look after
their belongings (both 28 per cent), whereas for men it is to sit by other people (28
per cent) [14].
Precautions taken (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]
% All Men Women
Base (all who take precautions) (1,507) (536) (971)
Sat near to other people 34 28 39
Look after my belongings 29 31 28
Travelled with someone else 23 18 28
Travel at a different time of day 16 14 18
Used a different route 15 15 15
Stay aware/vigilant 15 21 10
Avoided using that type of transport 12 9 15
Only take necessities with me 3 2 5
Carry a personal alarm 3 1 5
Note that responses 2% or below among all Londoners are not shown.
In terms of actual experiences, the proportion of women who have felt worried
about their personal security when using public transport in London in the past
three months is higher than men (19 per cent of women compared with 14 per
cent of men). Women are also more likely than men to experience an episode of
worry during the daytime. Women’s most recent experience of worry is roughly
equally split between day and night-time events (45 per cent daytime compared
with 54 per cent night-time) whereas when men experience an episode of worry,
this is more likely to occur at night (33 per cent daytime compared with 65 per cent
night-time) [14].
We asked people who have felt worried about their personal security when using
public transport in the last three months which type of transport they were using
when they experienced this event. For women and men who experienced a
worrying event on public transport in the past three months, the most likely type
of transport on which the event occurred was the bus (48 per cent of women and
men who felt worried in the last three months were on the bus). It is important to
note this reflects the higher use of buses by Londoners compared with Tube or
train. Women and men were also just as likely to experience worry on the Tube
(both 30 per cent in the past three months) [14].
Concerns about crime and antisocial behaviour affect how frequently people travel
on the Tube, bus or National Rail ‘a little’ or ‘a lot’ for slightly more than half of
Londoners (53 per cent). Women are affected to a greater extent than men: 61 per
Transport for London – Women 94

Women
cent of women report that the frequency with which they use the Tube, buses or
National Rail is affected ‘a little’ or ‘a lot’ because of concerns over crime or
antisocial behaviour compared to 43 per cent of men [14].
A higher proportion of women are affected in terms of their public transport travel
frequency because of these concerns across all three types of transport (Tube, bus,
National Rail) both during the day and at night [14].
Proportion of Londoners for whom concerns over crime/antisocial behaviour affect the
frequency of their public transport use ‘a lot/a little’ (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]
% All Men Women
Base (4,005) (1619) (2386)
Overall: During the day/after dark
Underground/buses/National Rail 53 43 61
During the day:
Underground/buses/National Rail 22 18 26
Underground 16 12 20
Buses 17 13 21
National Rail 11 8 14
After dark:
Underground/buses/National Rail 49 40 57
Underground 37 27 46
Buses 42 35 50
National Rail 29 21 37
Project Guardian
In 2014 TfL, the Metropolitan Police Service and the British Transport Police launched
Project Guardian to raise public awareness of unwanted sexual behaviour on the transport
network. This initiative focuses on encouraging victims to report these types of crimes –
which are historically significantly underreported - alongside more proactive police
enforcement and engagement. We have been supported by stakeholders that include
Everyday Sexism, End Violence Against Women Coalition and HollaBack UK, and the
project has resulted in a 16 per cent increase in the reports of unwanted sexual behaviour
on the transport network, and a 25 per cent increase in the detection of crimes of this
nature.
Among Londoners who are willing to answer questions about their experiences of
unwanted sexual behaviour while travelling around the city, 11 per cent of women report
experiencing some form of unwelcome sexual behaviour, including sexual harassment or
sexual assault, while travelling on, waiting for, or heading to/from public transport in
London in the previous year (the equivalent figure for men is two per cent). A range of
unwanted sexual behaviours are reported by Londoners, the most common being groping
or touching, sexual comments and staring [14].
Transport for London – Women 95

Women
A very low proportion of unwanted sexual behaviour is reported. There are a number of
theories as to why, including a socio-cultural model that sees harassment as a wider
manifestation of a system of asymmetrical power relationships between women and men.
Research also suggests that men can mistakenly view unwanted sexual behaviour as
harmless, thereby making it more commonplace, even though to women it is often
threatening and therefore harmful.
Women who experience unwanted sexual behaviour tend to employ the following coping
strategies:
Internal (psychological): endure, normalise/minimise – ‘you just have to put up with it’,
deny, reinterpret, self-blame
External (problem-solving): avoid, change behaviour (for example, walk to work a
different way), appease (for example, humour), seek social support, assert, attack,
make a formal complaint
Four barriers appear to prevent Londoners reporting incidents of unwanted sexual
behaviour while travelling in London to TfL or the police:
Normalisation: unwanted sexual behaviours are normalised, experiences are generally
ignored. They are viewed as a social nuisance and as part of a wider spectrum of
antisocial behaviour
Internalisation: the reporting process can be at odds with what someone who has
experienced unwanted sexual behaviour may need. Firstly, there is often a need to
internalise the situation, escape and forget about the incident as quickly as possible.
Secondly, there is frequently a need to seek empathy, support and validation from
someone who cares
Lack of awareness: most people are unaware that a reporting process exists. They are
unclear about what behaviours warrant action, who to tell and what the process will
entail
Credibility: very few people believe that reporting an unwanted sexual behaviour will
result in any form of justice
Our research has identified a number of key recommendations in this area which can help
TfL and other organisations to encourage greater reporting [45].
Transport for London – Women 96

Women
Safer Travel at Night (STaN) campaign: the use of illegal (unbooked) minicabs
TfL has run the Safer Travel at Night (STaN) campaign since 2003, with the aim of
reducing the use of illegal (unbooked) minicabs. We have targeted our
communication campaigns at young women aged between 16 and 34 in particular
[36].
We conduct research on an annual basis to monitor the use of unbooked minicabs
among our target audience, and we also evaluate our communications campaign
to determine its effectiveness.
STaN campaign posters
Since we began to monitor the use of unbooked minicabs among users of late
night venues in London, there has been a significant decline in their use. Among
women aged 16-34, two per cent used an unbooked minicab to reach their onward
destination on the night of the research in 2015, compared with 19 per cent in
2003. In 2015 this was down to zero amongst women [36].
Women and men have different views on using unbooked minicabs. While 26 per
cent of men say they are likely to use an illegal minicab in future, the figure is
much lower at 13 per cent among women (also 13 per cent for women aged 16-34)
[36].
Further to the reduction in the use of unbooked minicabs, initiatives by the TfLfunded
Metropolitan Police Service's Safer Transport Command (STC) and City of
London Police (CoLP) are helping to remove taxi touts from the streets. In a
targeted initiative at the end of 2013, more than 170 arrests were made for cabrelated
offences during two crackdowns as part of Operation Safer Travel at Night
[46].
The use of illegal (unbooked) minicabs (2014) [36]
% Use of illegal minicabs Men Women Women
(all ages) (16-34)
Base (324) (327) (288)
Used an illegal minicab to reach onward destination 2 - -
on night of interview
Likely to use illegal minicab in future 26 13 13
Unlikely to use illegal minicab in future 74 87 87
Transport for London – Women 97

Women
Customer satisfaction
We measure overall satisfaction with various transport types in London using an
11-point scale, with 10 representing extremely satisfied and zero representing
extremely dissatisfied. We then scale this up to 100.
Our standardised satisfaction ratings are shown in the table below. This allows us
to apply consistent analysis across a wide range of satisfaction research.
Average rating Level of satisfaction
Under 50
Very low/weak/poor
50-54 Low/weak/poor
55-64 Fairly/relatively/quite low/weak/poor
65-69 Fair/reasonable
70-79 Fairly/relatively/quite good
80-84 Good or fairly high
85-90 Very good or high
90+ Excellent or very high
Satisfaction levels are very similar between women and men. Only a few areas
have differences of more than two points out of 100:
Women are slightly more satisfied than men with Dial-a-Ride (92 per cent
compared with 89 per cent)
Women are slightly more satisfied than men with the Woolwich Ferry (83 per
cent compared with 80 per cent)
Transport for London – Women 98

Women
Overall satisfaction with transport types (2013/14) – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score (0-100) All Men Women
Bus services
Base (14,155) (6,283) (7,872)
Satisfaction score 85 85 85
Bus stations
Base (3,626) (1,544) (2,082)
Satisfaction score 78 79 78
Night buses
Base (910) (616) (294)
Satisfaction score 81 81 81
Underground
Base (17,634) (7,940) (9,694)
Satisfaction score 84 84 85
Overground
Base (5,397) (2,782) (2,615)
Satisfaction score 83 82 83
DLR
Base (13,398) (7,461) (5,937)
Satisfaction score 89 88 89
Dial-a-Ride
Base (2,572) (394) (2,175)
Satisfaction score 92 89 92
London River Services
Base (2,106) (1,131) (975)
Satisfaction score 90 90 90
Private Hire Vehicles
Base (439) (149) (290)
Satisfaction score 80 81 79
Taxis
Base (569) (275) (294)
Satisfaction score 83 83 84
Trams
Base (4,329) (2,069) (2,260)
Satisfaction score 89 89 90
Victoria Coach Station
Base (1,204) (608) (596)
Satisfaction score 82 82 81
Woolwich Ferry
Base (1,056) (732) (231)
Satisfaction score 79 80 83
Transport for London – Women 99

Score out of 100
Women
Bus
Overall satisfaction among bus users is high at 85 out of 100, and both women and
men give the same rating [16].
The long-term trend for bus users in London shows a consistent improvement in
the ratings of overall satisfaction for both women and men [16].
Overall satisfaction with buses over time [16]
100
90
80
70
76 77 78 78 78 80 80 80 80 80 82 83
76 77 78 77
79 80
77
79 79 80
83 83
85
85
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Men
Women
Transport for London – Women 100

Score out of 100
Women
As we have found across all types of transport, satisfaction with value for money
of the bus is lower than overall satisfaction. The satisfaction rating for value for
money is 72 out of 100 for women and 73 out of 100 for men [16].
Satisfaction with value for money of buses has returned to a relatively flat longterm
trend after a couple of lower ratings observed for women and men in recent
years. There is no discernible difference with the satisfaction of value for money
between women and men [16].
Satisfaction with value for money with buses over time [16]
100
90
80
70
60
78 77
78 77
72 71 71
73 73
71
74 74 73
73 74 73
70
66
68 67
68
67
71
73
71 72
50
40
30
20
10
0
Drivers of satisfaction
Men
Women
Journey time and ease of making a journey are key drivers of satisfaction with buses for
women and men. Ease of making the journey is the main driver for women, whereas
information on delays at the stop is the main driver for men [16].
Drivers of satisfaction for bus users [16]
Men
Satisfaction with info on delays at stop
Journey time
Ease of making journey
Time waited to catch bus
Driver approachability and helpfulness
Women
Ease of making journey
Journey time
Comfort inside the bus
Safety and security
Level of crowding
Transport for London – Women 101

Women
Tube
Overall satisfaction with the Tube among women in London is fairly high at 85 out
of 100. This is in line with men’s satisfaction level (84 out of 100) [16].
Long-term trends for Tube satisfaction show that levels of overall satisfaction
have risen ten points over the last twelve years. They have been fairly stable over
the last three years [16].
Overall satisfaction with the Tube over time [16]
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
75 77 78 79 77 77 80 80 79 80
74 76 77 77 76 76 79 79 78 80
84 83 85
83 82 84
Men
Women
Transport for London – Women 102

Women
Satisfaction with value for money of the Tube is lower than overall satisfaction
ratings. Women rate their satisfaction with value for money slightly lower than
men do, giving a rating of 68 out of 100 compared with 70 out of 100 by men [16].
Satisfaction with value for money with the Tube over time [16]
100
90
0
1
f
o
t
u
o
re
o
c
S
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
64 65 64 62 62 64 66 68 65 64
63 63 61 61 60 62
65 66 65
61
67 68 70
66 66 68
Men
Women
Satisfaction ratings are very similar between women and men for all measures
covered in the research (for example, level of crowding, personal safety) [16].
Drivers of satisfaction
Among women and men who use the Tube, overall satisfaction is related to the
same main drivers: ease of making the journey, comfort of journey, length of
journey time and length of time waiting for train. Men are slightly more likely to
prioritise train crowding (the fourth most important driver of overall satisfaction),
whereas women are more likely to prioritise personal safety on the train [16].
Drivers of satisfaction for Tube users [16]
Men
Length of journey time
Ease of making journey
Comfort of journey
Train crowding
Length of time waiting for train
Women
Ease of making journey
Comfort of journey
Length of journey time
Personal safety on train
Length of time waiting for train
Transport for London – Women 103

Women
Overground
Women on the whole are satisfied with the London Overground service at 83 out
of 100. Men also give a similar overall rating (82 out of 100) [16].
Women and men give very similar satisfaction ratings for each of the service
elements that we monitor. Women and men are fairly satisfied with their personal
safety when using the Overground, both rating their satisfaction as 88 out of 100
[16].
Overall satisfaction with London Overground over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score All Men Women
(0-100)
Base 2014/15 (5,397) (2,782) (2,615)
2009/10 73 73 73
2010/11 80 80 82
2011/12 82 81 82
2012/13 82 82 82
2013/14 82 82 83
2014/15 83 82 83
Satisfaction with value for money of London Overground is high at 73 out of 100
among women who use the service (men give a rating of 72 out of 100) [16].
Satisfaction with value for money with London Overground over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score All Men Women
(0-100)
Base 2014/15 (5,182) (2,678) (2,504)
2011/12 72 72 71
2012/13 71 71 70
2013/14 70 70 71
2014/15 73 72 73
Drivers of satisfaction
Ease of making a journey is the biggest driver of overall satisfaction for women
when using London Overground, whereas feeling valued as a customer is the
biggest driver for men. How well information meets needs is the second biggest
driver for women, whereas for men it’s about the ease of making a journey [16].
Transport for London – Women 104

Women
The main drivers of overall satisfaction are:
Drivers of satisfaction for Overground users [16]
Men
Feel valued as a customer
Ease of making journey
Condition and state of repair on train
Comfort of train
Information about service disruptions on the
train
Women
Ease of making journey
How well the information or assistance meet
needs
Ease of finding information at station
Condition and state of repair of the train
Comfort of train
DLR
Overall satisfaction with the DLR is very good/high among women at 89 out of 100
(compared with 88 out of 100 for men) [16].
Overall satisfaction with DLR over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score All Men Women
(0-100)
Base 2014/15 (13,398) (7,461) (5,937)
2009/10 81 81 81
2010/11 81 81 82
2011/12 82 82 83
2012/13 87 86 87
2013/14 87 86 88
2014/15 89 88 89
As with other types of transport, we have observed no real differences in
satisfaction ratings with the service between women and men using the DLR [16].
Satisfaction with value for money of the DLR among women is higher than other
types of transport at 77 out of 100, and the same rating is given by men [16].
Satisfaction with value for money with DLR over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score All Men Women
(0-100)
Base 2014/15 (12,839) (7,165) (5,674)
2011/12 72 72 72
2013/14 75 75 75
2014/15 77 77 77
Transport for London – Women 105

Women
Drivers of satisfaction
The top drivers of overall satisfaction with the DLR are similar for women and
men, although women focus slightly more on how issues with using tickets were
resolved, whereas men are more focused on the reliability of trains [16]. The main
drivers of satisfaction are:
Drivers of satisfaction for DLR users [16]
Men
Ease of making journey
Reliability of trains
Comfort inside the train
Length of time journey took
Feel valued as a customer
Women
Ease of making journey
How issues using ticket were resolved
Comfort inside the train
Length of time journey took
Reliability of trains
Trams
Overall satisfaction with trams is high among customers at 89 out of 100. This is
slightly higher among women than men (90 out of 100 for women compared with
89 out of 100 for men) [16].
Overall satisfaction with trams over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score All Men Women
(0-100)
Base 2014/15 (4,329) (2,069) (2,260)
2009/10 86 85 88
2010/11 85 86 85
2011/12 86 86 86
2012/13 89 88 90
2013/14 89 88 90
2014/15 89 89 90
* Denotes small base size (percentages not shown in this report for base sizes of less than 50).
Overall satisfaction with value for money on the tram network is quite good (78
out of 100) but it is slightly lower for women than men (77 out of 100 for women
compared with 79 out of 100 for men) [16].
Satisfaction with value for money with trams over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score All Men Women
(0-100)
Base 2014/15 (2,824) (1,353) (1,471)
2011/12 73 73 73
2012/13 78 77 78
2013/14 78 79 78
2014/15 78 79 77
* Denotes small base size (percentages not shown in this report for base sizes of less than 50).
Transport for London – Women 106

Women
Streets
Women are significantly less likely than men to be satisfied with the streets and
pavements after their last journey by foot (65 per cent of women were satisfied
compared with 72 per cent of men) [34].
Fifty-nine per cent of women are satisfied with the streets for their last car journey
(the equivalent figure for men is 61 per cent and the difference is not statistically
significant) [34].
Forty-six per cent of all Londoners are satisfied with their last cycling journey.
Women are less satisfied compared to men (39 per cent of women compared with
50 per cent of men).
Please note that satisfaction for streets is calculated as a combination of ‘very
satisfied’ and ‘fairly satisfied’ rather than the 11 point scale that we have used for
other transport types.
Overall satisfaction with streets and pavement after last journey – walking journey [34]
Net fairly
All Men Women
satisfied/very
satisfied (%)
Base 2014/15 (957) (379) (578)
2011 64 66 62
2012 68 71 65
2013 69 72 67
2014 68 73 63
2015 68 72 65
Overall satisfaction with streets and pavement after last journey over time - car journey [34]
Net fairly
All Men Women
satisfied/very
satisfied (%)
Base 2014/15 (830) (333) (497)
2011 54 57 52
2012 62 60 64
2013 57 58 56
2014 61 62 59
2015 60 61 59
Transport for London – Women 107

Women
Overall satisfaction with streets and pavement after last journey over time - cycling journey [34]
Net fairly
All Men Women
satisfied/very
satisfied (%)
Base 2014/15 (357) (187) (170)
2011 49 49 49
2012 55 55 56
2013 51 51 52
2014 54 57 51
2015 46 50 39
Seventeen per cent of women have walked in London with a pram or pushchair
(compared to 11 per cent of men) and among these women 11 per cent think that
it is easier to walk around London with a pram or pushchair this year than last
(although 14 per cent think that it has become more difficult) [34].
Transport for London – Women 108

Women
Transport for London Road Network (TRLN)
Satisfaction with the TLRN is reasonable to fairly good. Women users of the TLRN
give a score of 69 out of 100 for walking, 71 out of 100 for travelling by bus and
cycling on red routes and 68 out of 100 for driving. There is very little difference
between the ratings given by women and men [16].
Overall satisfaction – general impression of red routes over time [16]
Satisfaction score (0-100) All Men Women
Walking
Base 2014-15 (1,254) (591) (663)
2013/14 70 68 71
2014/15 68 66 69
Travelling by bus
Base 2014-15 (4,620) (1,808) (2,812)
2013/14 69 67 72
2014/15 71 70 71
Driving
Base 2014-15 (3,605) (1,536) (2,069)
2013/14 67 66 71
2014/15 67 65 68
Cycling
Base 2014-15 (1,838) (1,022) (816)
2013/14 69 68 68
2014/15 70 70 71
Transport for London – Women 109

Women
Access to information
From our research, women are thought to be more cautious in their travel
behaviour than men. Our customer segmentation studies (Touchpoints) suggest
that women are more likely to fit into the categories of ‘travel shy’, ‘reassurance
seeker’ and ‘cautious planner’. For all three categories, levels of confidence using
the public transport network are relatively low (particularly so for people who are
classed as ‘travel shy’). As a result, some women may choose to restrict
themselves to familiar journeys where possible or seek advice and information to
help plan and complete journeys [47].
We provide a wide range of information sources. While there are some specific
differences in the use of particular information sources by women compared to
men (for example, women are more likely than men to use the pocket Tube map -
85 per cent compared with 73 per cent), on the whole, awareness and use of
information sources is comparable between women and men [48].
Access to the internet
Ninety-one per cent of women access the internet, with 88 per cent accessing it at
home, 58 per cent ‘on the move’ and 52 per cent at work. The proportion of
women accessing the internet is almost the same as men (93 per cent). However,
men are more likely to access the internet in multiple places [15].
Accessing the internet [15]
% Men Women
Base (809) (1,192)
Any access 93 91
Access at home 91 88
Access ‘on the move’ 63 58
Access at work 60 52
Women use the internet for a variety of reasons. The top reasons are:
Email (94 per cent of women who access the internet)
Finding and sourcing information (90 per cent)
Maps and directions (84 per cent)
Buying goods and services (78 per cent)
Accessing live travel information (78 per cent) [15]
Transport for London – Women 110

Women
Overall internet use is very similar between women and men. However, women
are less likely than men to use the internet for:
Watching video content (56 per cent women compared with 69 per cent men)
Banking (62 per cent women compared with 74 per cent men)
Work-related matters (60 per cent women compared with 70 per cent men)
Contacting companies for customer service (48 per cent women compared
with 57 per cent men) [15]
Seventy per cent of women who access the internet use it for social networking
(69 per cent of men). The most popular social networking site for both women and
men is Facebook, which is used by 87 per cent of women who use social networks
(and 77 per cent of men).
There are some differences between the social media sites used by women and
men. Men are more likely than women to use YouTube (36 per cent of women who
use social networking compared with 45 per cent of men), Twitter (29 per cent of
women who use social networking compared with 36 per cent of men) and
LinkedIn (19 per cent of women who use social networking compared with 31 per
cent of men). Women are more likely to use Instagram than men (29 per cent of
women who use social networking compared with 16 per cent of men) [15].
Device usage and behaviour
Women and men are equally likely to own a smartphone (76 per cent women
compared with 78 per cent men). Smartphone use has significantly increased over
the last few years (in 2010, 55 per cent of women owned a smartphone) [15].
Proportion of Londoners who own a smartphone (iPhone, BlackBerry, other) (April 2014) [15]
% Men Women
Base (809) (1,192)
Uses a smartphone 78 76
Transport for London – Women 111

Women
Using the TfL website
Seventy-eight per cent of both women and men living in London access the TfL
website. Twenty-eight per cent of women and 34 per cent of men access the TfL
website three to four times a week or more [15].
Overall, 19 per cent of women in London never use the TfL website (compared
with 20 per cent of men) [15].
Proportion of Londoners who use www.tfl.gov.uk [15]
% Men Women
Base (809) (1,192)
Uses TfL website 78 78
Daily 10 10
3-4 times a week 24 18
3-4 times a month 20 20
Once a month 15 18
Less than once a month 10 13
Never 20 19
Don’t know/refused 1 2
Women who use the TfL website are more likely than men to use Journey Planner
(71 per cent of women compared with 62 per cent of men). Women are less likely
than men to visit the website for live travel updates (27 per cent of women
compared with 34 per cent of men) or for information on planned works and
closures (23 per cent of women compared with 25 per cent of men) [37].
Main purpose of today’s visit to the TfL website (2013) [37]
% Men Women
Base (12,060) (16,217)
Using Journey Planner to plan a route 62 71
Finding out live travel information 34 27
Finding out about planned works or closures 25 23
Doing something related to Oyster cards or other tickets 22 19
Finding a map 16 14
Doing something related to Congestion Charge 5 4
Finding out about cycling 3 2
Finding out about roads or driving 2 2
Other 5 3
Transport for London – Women 112

Women
Accessing information in the event of travel disruption
Women are less likely than men to seek real-time travel information (80 per cent
compared with 85 per cent of men). Fifty per cent of women obtain information
from staff or announcements/displays about problems or delays on public
transport (compared with 57 per cent of men). Forty-two per cent of women
(compared with 45 per cent of men) get information from the TfL website and
nine per cent from a non-TfL site that features London travel advice (13 per cent
for men) [15].
Seventeen per cent of women use apps to seek real-time travel information on
disruptions compared with 22 per cent of men. People also use social media; four
per cent of women use TfL’s Twitter feed and three per cent use another Twitter
feed (the figures for men are five per cent and three per cent respectively) [15].
Transport for London – Women 113

Older People
Summary: Older people
Key findings
Londoners aged 65 or over make up 11 per cent of London’s population [2]
Older Londoners tend to make fewer weekday journeys (2.3 journeys on average
compared with 2.7 for Londoners overall). This is especially the case among Londoners
aged 70-79 (2.4 journeys) and those aged 80 and over (1.6 journeys) [12]
Walking is the most frequently used type of transport by older Londoners aged 65 and
over (86 per cent walk at least once a week). Sixty-one per cent travel by bus, 45 per
cent travel by car as a passenger and 45 per cent drive a car at least once a week [12]
Older Londoners tend to give higher overall satisfaction scores for each transport type
than all Londoners [16]
Older Londoners are less likely than Londoners overall to state that their travel
frequency on buses, Tube or National Rail is affected ‘a lot’ or ‘a little’ by concerns over
crime and antisocial behaviour (39 per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over compared
with 53 per cent all Londoners) [14]
Older Londoners are less likely to access the internet than Londoners overall (64 per
cent of Londoners aged 65 and over compared with 92 per cent of all Londoners) [15]
Older Londoners, aged 65 or over are less likely to use the TfL website than Londoners
overall (47 per cent compared with 78 per cent of all Londoners) [15]
Older Londoners are also less likely to use a smartphone (25 per cent compared with 77
per cent) [15]
Transport for London – Older People 114

Older People
Profile of older Londoners
Londoners aged 65 and over make up 11 per cent of the Capital’s population [2].
Older Londoners have a different demographic profile to the total London
population in a number of ways. Compared with all Londoners, people aged 65
and over are more likely to be women (55 per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over
are women compared with 51 per cent of all Londoners), from a white ethnic
group (81 per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over are white compared with 62 per
cent of all Londoners), on an annual household income of less than £20,000 per
year (65 per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over live in a lower income household
compared with 36 per cent of all Londoners) and be disabled (37 per cent of
Londoners aged 65 and over are disabled compared with 11 per cent of all
Londoners) [12]. Each of these factors can affect the travel behaviour and
attitudes of older people in London.
Transport behaviour
Older people tend to travel less frequently. Walking is the most commonly used
transport option by older Londoners; 86 per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over
walk at least once a week. The bus is also a key form of transport for people aged
65 and over, with 61 per cent saying they use the bus at least once a week (the
same amount as for all Londoners) [12].
With the exception of driving and travelling by bus, older Londoners use all forms
of transport less frequently than the total London population (for example,
walking 86 per cent compared with 96 per cent overall; Tube 23 per cent
compared with 39 per cent overall) [12].
Forty-five per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over drive a car at least once a
week and 45 per cent travel by car as a passenger [12]
Around three-quarters of Londoners aged between 65 and 69 hold a full
driving licence (74 per cent aged between 65 and 69 compared with 64 per cent
all Londoners). This drops considerably for the older age groups (58 per cent
for 70-79 year olds and 38 per cent for 80+) [12]
A similar proportion have access to a car (73 per cent of Londoners aged
between 65 and 69 compared with 65 per cent all Londoners). This drops
considerably for the older age groups (63 per cent for 70-79 year olds and 43
per cent for 80+) [12]
Lower numbers of Londoners aged 65 and over cycle as a means of transport.
Eight per cent sometimes use a bicycle to get around London compared with
17 per cent of the wider London population [17]
Dial-a-Ride members tend to have an older age profile than disabled
Londoners overall; 83 per cent of Dial-a-Ride members are aged 65 or over
compared with 41 per cent of all disabled Londoners [30, AB]
Fifty-two per cent of weekday journeys made by Londoners aged 65 and over
are for shopping/personal business, while 31 per cent are for leisure purposes
[12]
Transport for London – Older People 115

Older People
Barriers
Many of the barriers to greater public transport use that affect all Londoners are
less likely to impact people aged 65 and over. For example, slow journey times are
seen as a barrier to increased public transport use for 41 per cent of all Londoners,
but only 18 per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over [14].
The most commonly mentioned barrier to increased public transport use among
older Londoners is concern about overcrowded services (40 per cent of older
Londoners mention overcrowding compared with 59 per cent of all Londoners)
and concerns around antisocial behaviour (34 per cent for both Londoners aged 65
and over and all Londoners) [14].
Londoners aged 65 or over are also more likely to be classified as ‘unworried’ (83
per cent of Londoners aged 65 or over compared with 75 per cent of all Londoners)
and less likely to take precautions against being a victim of crime or antisocial
behaviour on public transport (32 per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over
compared with 38 per cent of all Londoners). People in this age group are also less
likely to say that concerns over crime or antisocial behaviour affect the frequency
of their public transport use ‘a lot’ or ‘a little’ than all Londoners (39 per cent of
Londoners aged 65 or over compared with 53 per cent of all Londoners) [14].
Customer satisfaction
Older customers are more satisfied with all types of transport than customers
overall [16].
Overall satisfaction with buses is high at 90 out of 100 (compared with 85 for
customers overall) [16]
Overall satisfaction with the Tube is also high at 89 out of 100 (compared with
84 out of 100 for all customers) [16]
Older Londoners are also more satisfied with value for money than customers
overall [16]
Londoners aged 65 and over are less satisfied with the streets and pavements
on their last walking journey than Londoners overall (57 per cent compared
with 68 per cent) [34]
Transport for London – Older People 116

Older People
Access to information
Internet access is lower among Londoners aged 65 and over than Londoners
overall (64 per cent compared with 92 per cent) [15].
Use of the TfL website declines with age: 47 per cent of Londoners aged 65 and
over access the TfL website compared with 78 per cent of all Londoners [15].
Older Londoners who do visit the website do so less frequently than all
Londoners [15]
Similarly, a much lower proportion of older Londoners aged 65 and over use a
smartphone than all Londoners (25 per cent compared with 77 per cent) [15]
Transport for London – Older People 117

Older People
Introduction
People aged 65 and over make up 11 per cent of London’s population, and it is
projected that this proportion will grow over time [2, 18].
For many people, the transition from working to retirement changes the way that
they use public transport in London. Journey purposes shift away from the focus of
work, and journeys tend to be made less frequently.
The focus of this chapter is predominantly on Londoners aged 65 and over. Where
possible, data is shown for the age bands of 65-69, 70-79 and 80+, though other
similar age brackets are used where data is not available.
Note that transport behaviour, attitudes and barriers in this chapter may well be
influenced by a number of factors other than age, with disability, gender, income
and education all affecting perceptions towards travel in London.
Transport for London – Older People 118

Older People
Profile of older people in London
Eleven per cent of Londoners are aged 65 and over. Three per cent of the London
population is aged 80 and over [2].
2011 Census – age profile of Londoners [2]
Proportion of age group who are…
% All Men Women
15 and under 20 51 49
16-24 12 50 50
25-59 53 50 50
60-64 4 48 52
65-69 3 47 53
70-79 5 46 54
80+ 3 37 63
Percentage change in population of London (1971–2011) [49, AB]
% change 1971–1981 1981–1991 1991–2001 2001–2011
All ages -10 0 +7 +12
0-14 -22 +2 +8 +8
15-64 -8 +2 +10 +17
65+ +4 -8 -7 +1
The proportion of older Londoners is set to grow. The GLA estimate is that by
2040, 15 per cent of London’s population will be aged 65 or over [18].
Transport for London – Older People 119

Proportion of population
in each age group
0 ‒ 4
5 ‒ 9
10 ‒ 14
15 ‒ 19
20 ‒ 24
25 ‒ 29
30 ‒ 34
35 ‒ 39
40 ‒ 44
45 ‒ 49
50 ‒ 54
55 ‒ 59
60 ‒ 64
65 ‒ 69
70 ‒ 74
75 ‒ 79
80 ‒ 84
85 ‒ 89
90 ‒ 94
95 ‒ 99
100 and over
Older People
The chart below shows how, in comparison to the UK average, London has a
smaller proportion of people aged 65 and over and a greater proportion of people
aged between 20 and 44. Eighteen per cent of the total UK population are aged 65
or over [2].
Population split by age (2011) [2]
12%
10%
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%
United Kingdom
London
Londoners aged 65 and over are more likely to be women (56 per cent) than all
Londoners (51 per cent). The difference is particularly pronounced among
Londoners aged 80 and over where 63 per cent are women [2].
Proportion of Londoners who are women by age (2011) [2]
Transport for London – Older People 120

Older People
In this document we use two primary sources of of demographic data: the Office
for National Statistics Census and the London Travel Demand Survey. The
following table shows the demographic breakdown of Londoners recorded in the
LTDS.
LTDS demographic profile of older people in London (2013/14) [12]
% All 65+ 65-69 70-79 80+
Base (15,700) (2,475) (748) (1,113) (614)
Gender
Men 49 45 49 44 41
Women 51 55 51 56 59
Ethnicity
White 62 81 80 78 88
BAME 37 19 20 22 12
Household income
Less than £10,000 17 34 23 34 48
£10,000–£19,999 19 31 29 32 31
£20,000–£34,999 20 17 22 17 12
£35,000–£49,999 13 7 9 7 3
£50,000–£74,999 15 6 7 6 3
£75,000+ 16 6 9 5 3
Working status*
Working full-time 47 5 10 3 1
Working part-time 11 6 11 6 1
Student 10 - - - -
Retired 15 86 76 87 97
Not working 16 3 4 4 2
Disabled
Yes 11 37 20 34 64
No 89 63 80 66 36
Impairment affects travel
Yes 10 34 19 31 60
No 90 66 81 69 40
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five and working status does not include under 16s.
All TfL surveys use the Equality Act 2010 to define disabled people as those who define themselves as having a long-term physical or mental
disability or health issue that impacts on their daily activities, the work they can do, or limits their ability to travel.
Transport for London – Older People 121

Older People
White Londoners tend to have an older age profile than BAME Londoners. This is
seen in Census data below, where 78 per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over are
from a white ethnic group, compared with 60 per cent of all Londoners [2].
Proportion of older Londoners by detailed ethnic group [2]
% All 65+
White: total 60 78
English/Welsh/Scottish/Northern Irish/British 45 67
Irish 2 5
Gypsy or Irish Traveller - -
Other white 13 6
Mixed/multiple ethnic group: total 5 1
White and black Caribbean 1 -
White and black African 1 -
White and Asian 1 -
Other Mixed 1 -
Asian/Asian British: total 18 11
Indian 7 6
Pakistani 3 1
Bangladeshi 3 1
Chinese 2 1
Other Asian 5 2
Black/African/Caribbean/black British: total 13 8
African 7 2
Caribbean 4 5
Other black 2 1
Other ethnic group: total 3 2
Arab 1 -
Any other ethnic group 2 1
Employment and income
Eighty-six per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over are retired and 11 per cent are
in full- or part-time work. The proportion of Londoners who are retired ranges
from 76 per cent among Londoners aged 65-69 to 97 per cent among Londoners
aged 80 or over [12].
With increasing age the proportion of Londoners who are working decreases and
therefore a shift occurs towards increasing proportions in the lower bands for
household income [12]. Please note that household income does not always
reflect employment or household wealth.
Average household incomes are substantially lower for older Londoners than
Londoners overall; 34 per cent of Londoners aged 65 or over have an annual
household income of less than £10,000, compared with 17 per cent of all
Londoners [12].
Transport for London – Older People 122

Older People
Older disabled people
Of all Londoners aged 65 and over, 37 per cent report that they are disabled or
have a health issue that limits their daily activities. With increasing age, the
proportion of people who report that they are disabled or have a health issue that
limits their ability to travel and get about increases to 64 per cent among
Londoners aged 80 or over [12].
You can find more information about disabled Londoners in the relevant chapter
of this report.
London boroughs
The boroughs with the highest proportion of older residents are:
London boroughs with the highest proportion of older residents [2]
Borough
% proportion of
older residents
Havering 18
Bromley 17
Bexley 16
Sutton 14
Harrow 14
The boroughs with the lowest proportion of older residents are:
London boroughs with the lowest proportion of older residents [2]
Borough
% proportion of
older residents
Tower Hamlets 6
Newham 7
Hackney 7
Lambeth 8
Southwark 8
Transport for London – Older People 123

Older People
Travel behaviour
Older Londoners aged 65 or over make an average of 2.3 trips per weekday,
compared with 2.7 trips per weekday for all Londoners [12].
Londoners aged between 65 and 69 make an average of 2.7 trips per weekday, in
line with the number of trips made by Londoners overall. This average drops to 2.4
among Londoners aged between 70 and 79 and 1.6 among people aged 80 and
over [12]. This is likely to be related to the lower proportion of older Londoners in
work, as retired Londoners do not need to make regular journeys to work, as well
as decreasing individual mobility.
Transport types used
The most frequent method of transport used by older Londoners and all
Londoners is walking. Eighty-six per cent of Londoners aged 65 or over walk at
least once a week. This figure is higher for Londoners aged under 80; 94 per cent
of Londoners aged 65-69 walk at least once a week. The equivalent figure is 90 per
cent among Londoners aged 70-79, and 69 per cent among Londoners aged 80 or
older [12].
Buses are the next most common type of transport used by older Londoners; 61
per cent of Londoners aged 65 or over use the bus at least once a week. Use of the
bus is higher among Londoners aged between 65 and 79 (65 per cent of Londoners
aged 65-79 use the bus at least once a week) but this decreases among Londoners
aged 80 or over (50 per cent). For all other types of transport, except the car as a
passenger and minicab, levels of use either remain the same or decline as age
increases [12].
Among Londoners aged 65-69, 60 per cent drive a car at least once a week which
is higher than Londoners overall (39 per cent). Londoners aged 80 or over are
considerably less likely to drive a car, and only 27 per cent drive on a weekly basis
[12].
Transport for London – Older People 124

Older People
Proportion of Londoners using types of transport at least once a week (2013/14) [12]
% All 65+ 65-69 70-79 80+
Base (15,700) (2,475) (748) (1,113) (614)
Walking 96 86 94 90 69
Bus 61 61 65 65 50
Car (as a passenger) 48 45 44 44 45
Car (as a driver) 39 45 60 44 27
Tube 39 23 33 23 11
National Rail 17 11 13 13 6
Overground 9 4 6 4 1
Other taxi/minicab (PHV) 6 5 4 6 6
London taxi/black cab 5 3 3 3 3
DLR 4 2 2 2 1
Tram (London Tramlink) 2 1 1 2 1
Motorbike 1 - 1 - -
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Walking
Older Londoners are less likely to walk at least once a week than all Londoners (86
per cent of Londoners aged 65 or over walk once a week compared with 96 per
cent of all Londoners). The proportion of older Londoners who walk declines with
age; 94 per cent of 65 to 69 year olds walk at least once a week compared with 90
per cent of 70 to 79 year olds and 69 per cent of Londoners aged 80 or over [12].
Frequency of walking (2013/14) [12]
% All 65+ 65-69 70-79 80+
Base (15,700) (2,475) (748) (1,113) (614)
5 or more days a week 83 61 72 64 41
3 or 4 days a week 6 13 13 13 14
2 days a week 4 7 6 7 8
1 day a week 3 5 3 5 6
At least once a fortnight 1 1 1 2 2
At least once a month 1 2 1 1 3
At least once a year 1 2 1 2 5
Not used in last year 1 7 2 5 18
Never used - 1 - 1 3
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Transport for London – Older People 125

Older People
The proportion of Londoners aged 65 and over who walk at least once a week to
complete small errands (84 per cent) is in line with the 86 per cent of all Londoners
who do this. However, smaller proportions of people aged 65 and over walk for
other purposes listed compared with all Londoners [19].
Walking at least once a week by purpose of journey (2015) [19]
% who walk at least once a week All 65+
Base (1,000) (314)
Walk…
To complete small errands such as getting a newspaper or
86 84
posting a letter
As part of a longer journey 77 70
To visit friends and relatives 49 41
To visit pubs/restaurants/cinemas and other social places 53 40
To get to work/school/college 52 11
To take a child to school 18 4
Bus
Bus use at least once a week among Londoners aged 65 and over is 61 per cent,
which is the same level as for all Londoners. Use of the bus among older
Londoners is higher among those aged between 65 and 79 (65 per cent use the bus
at least once a week) and then decreases among Londoners aged 80 or over (50
per cent) [12].
Frequency of travelling by bus (2013/14) [12]
% All 65+ 65-69 70-79 80+
Base (15,700) (2,475) (748) (1,113) (614)
5 or more days a week 28 20 21 22 18
3 or 4 days a week 12 20 22 21 14
2 days a week 11 12 13 13 10
1 day a week 10 9 9 9 8
At least once a fortnight 5 6 6 6 4
At least once a month 10 8 9 8 7
At least once a year 14 11 11 10 11
Not used in last year 7 13 7 10 25
Never used 2 2 1 1 3
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Transport for London – Older People 126

Older People
People over 60 years old are significantly less likely to use the bus for work
purposes, during the day or night. They’re more likely to use the bus for shopping,
personal business and visiting friends/ relatives, both during the day and at night
[28].
Purpose of bus journey by age and time of day (2014) [28]
During the day
At night
% All 60+ All 60+
Base (weighted) (37,585) (4,933) (9,121) (263)
To/from or for work 53 20 53 39
To/from
school/education
7 1 4 2
To/from shopping 11 33 1 6
Visiting
friends/relatives
9 12 13 18
Leisure 9 16 21 19
Personal business 7 13 2 7
Other purpose 3 6 6 9
Car
Forty-five per cent of Londoners aged 65 or over drive a car at least once a week
and 45 per cent travel as a passenger in a car [12].
Fifty-eight per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over hold a full car driving licence,
which is slightly lower than the figure for Londoners overall (64 per cent all
Londoners aged 17 or over). The proportion of older Londoners who hold a full car
driving licence reduces with age: 74 per cent of 65 to 69 year olds hold a full driving
licence compared to 58 per cent of those aged 70-79, and 38 per cent of people
aged over 80 [12].
Proportion of Londoners with a full car driving licence (2013/14) [12]
% All (17+) 65+ 65-69 70-79 80+
Base (13,127) (2,475) (748) (1,113) (614)
Holds a full car driving licence 64 58 74 58 38
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Household access to a car reduces with age; 61 per cent of Londoners aged 65 and
over have a car in their household compared with 65 per cent across all Londoners.
Among Londoners aged 65-69, access to a car in the household is higher at 73 per
cent and this drops to 63 per cent among Londoners aged 70-79, and 43 per cent
for Londoners aged 80 and over [12].
Transport for London – Older People 127

Older People
Proportion of Londoners in a household with access to a car (2013/14) [12]
% All 65+ 65-69 70-79 80+
Base (15,700) (2,475) (748) (1,113) (614)
0 cars 35 39 27 37 57
1 car 45 46 48 49 37
2+ cars 20 16 25 14 7
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
After the age of 80, older people tend to drive less frequently. Driving can provide
a sense of self-worth through independence and equality with other Londoners,
freedom through greater accessibility and convenience, and enjoyment of the act
itself. Therefore giving up driving is an important and emotional event [50].
‘When I relinquish my car it will be like my snail shell on my back is being taken
away.’ (Driver aged 65+) [50]
Among Londoners aged 60 and over who do not drive 5 , the most common reasons
for not doing so are a lack of interest (43 per cent), availability of friends and family
to drive them instead (38 per cent), a focus on feeling too old (27 per cent) and
being concerned about safety (22 per cent) [51].
Reasons for not driving by age (England) (2013) [51]
% All 17+ 60+
Base (2,965) (990)
Not interested in driving 29 43
Family/friends drive me when necessary 32 38
Too old 9 27
Safety concerns/nervous about driving 17 22
Other forms of transport available 20 14
Physical difficulties/health impairments 11 12
Cost of learning to drive 32 10
Cost of buying a car 25 10
Cost of insurance 25 8
Busy/congested roads 6 7
Other general motoring costs 12 5
Put off by theory/practical test 4 2
Too busy to learn 10 2
Environmental reasons 3 1
Other 5 3
Based on individuals aged 17 and over who do not hold a full driving licence and are not currently learning to drive.
5 Note that these data are for Great Britain and not London specifically.
Transport for London – Older People 128

Older People
Tube
Twenty-three per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over use the Tube at least once a
week. This is considerably lower than Londoners overall (39 per cent). The
proportion using the Tube at least once a week decreases further with age, from
33 per cent of Londoners aged 65-69, to 25 per cent among 70 to 79 year olds and
11 per cent for those aged 80 and over [12].
Frequency of travelling by Tube (2013/14) [12]
% All 65+ 65-69 70-79 80+
Base (15,700) (2,475) (748) (1,113) (614)
5 or more days a week 15 3 5 3 1
3 or 4 days a week 7 6 6 7 4
2 days a week 8 6 10 6 2
1 day a week 9 7 12 9 4
At least once a fortnight 8 4 9 8 4
At least once a month 15 12 14 12 7
At least once a year 25 24 26 25 21
Not used in last year 11 28 16 26 49
Never used 3 5 2 5 8
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Cycling
Eight per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over sometimes use a bike to get around
London [17]. Note that we do not currently have data to analyse this age group
further.
Proportion of Londoners who cycle (November 2014) [17]
% All 65+
Base (2,192) (323)
Cyclist (sometimes uses a bike to get
around London)
Non-cyclist (never uses a bike to get
around London)
17 8
83 92
The proportion of Londoners aged 65 and over who can ride a bike (72 per cent) is
lower than the total population of Londoners (83 per cent) [17].
Proportion of Londoners able to ride a bike (November 2014) [17]
% All 65+
Base (2,192) (323)
Can ride a bike 83 72
Cannot ride a bike 15 25
Transport for London – Older People 129

Older People
We have developed a behavioural change model to look at Londoners’ readiness
to cycle or cycle more. Sixty-nine per cent of Londoners classified themselves as
being in the ‘pre-contemplation’ category (defined in the behaviour model table
below). Londoners aged 65 and over show a lower level of ‘contemplation’ than
other Londoners, and 87 per cent are in the pre-contemplation category [17].
A small proportion of Londoners aged 65 and over classify themselves as being in
the ‘sustained change’ category, meaning that they started cycling a while ago
and are still doing it occasionally or regularly [17].
Behaviour change model cycling (November 2014) [17]
% All 65+
Base (all) (2,192) (323)
Pre-contemplation:
‘You have never thought about it, but would be unlikely to start in the future’
‘You have thought about it, but don’t intend starting in the future’
‘You have never thought about it, but could be open to it in the future’
Contemplation:
‘You are thinking about starting soon’
Preparation:
‘You have decided to start soon’
Change:
‘You have tried to start recently, but am finding it difficult’
‘You have started recently and am finding it quite easy so far’
Sustained change:
‘You started a while ago and am still doing it occasionally’
‘You started a while ago and am still doing it regularly’
Lapsed:
‘You started doing this but couldn’t stick to it’
69 87
10 2
3 -
2 -
10 6
6 4
Transport for London – Older People 130

Older People
Cycling schemes
Awareness of Cycle Hire among Londoners aged 65 and over is 95 per cent. This is
similar to awareness among all Londoners which stands at 91 per cent. Despite
high awareness, only one per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over have actually
used the scheme compared to 17 per cent of all Londoners [17].
Two per cent of Londoners aged 65 or over intend to use Cycle Hire in the future
(compared with 27 per cent of all Londoners who haven’t yet hired a bicycle) [17].
Evidence suggests older Londoners are less likely to check for availability of
bicycles and/or spaces before hiring a bicycle (25 per cent of people aged over 55
always or usually check for bicycle availability, compared with 39 per cent of
people aged 16-34) [52]. This is most probably related to lower use of technology
among older Londoners [15].
Expected use of Cycle Hire in the future (November 2014) [17]
% All 65+
Base (1,180) (165)
Yes definitely/probably 27 2
Yes, definitely 9 0
Yes, probably 18 2
No, probably not 30 30
No, definitely not 33 61
Not sure 10 6
Seventy per cent of older Londoners are aware of Cycle Superhighways, which is
higher than the figure for all Londoners (61 per cent). Seven per cent of older
Londoners say that they are likely to use Cycle Superhighways in the future [17].
Expected use of Cycle Superhighways (November 2014) [17]
% All 65+
Base (1,180) (165)
Yes definitely/ probably 23 7
Yes, definitely 6 1
Yes, probably 17 6
No, probably not 28 29
No, definitely not 31 55
Not sure 17 9
Transport for London – Older People 131

Older People
Dial-a-Ride
Dial-a-Ride members tend to have an older age profile than disabled Londoners
overall. Eighty-three per cent of Dial-a-Ride members are aged 65 and over,
compared with 41 per cent of all disabled Londoners. Twenty-seven per cent of
Dial-a-Ride members are aged between 75-84 and 43 per cent are 85 and over,
compared with 16 per cent and eight per cent respectively for all disabled
Londoners [30, AB].
Dial-a-Ride members are more likely to be women (74 per cent) [30].
Dial-a-Ride (DaR) membership by age (2012 based on 2010 data) [2, 30]
% All disabled Londoners
Census
DaR members
(41,451)
Under 25 9 1
25-34 7 2
35-49 19 5
50-64 25 11
65-74 17 13
75-84 16 28
85+ 8 40
Where the proportion of Dial-a-Ride members does not sum to 100 per cent, this is due to no age being listed for the member on
file.
Journey purpose
The proportion of weekday journeys made for different purposes varies by age.
Twenty-eight per cent of journeys are work-related for all Londoners
(travelling to/from usual workplace, or ‘other work-related’ travel) whereas
only seven per cent of older Londoners’ weekday journeys are for this purpose
Fifty-two per cent of older Londoners’ journeys are for shopping and personal
business (compared with 24 per cent for all Londoners)
Leisure journeys make up 31 per cent of weekday trips for older Londoners
(compared with 23 per cent for all Londoners) [12]
Weekday journey purpose (2013/14) [12]
% All 65+ 65-69 70-79 80+
Base – all trips by Londoners
Shopping/personal business 24 52 46 53 64
Usual workplace 20 4 6 3 -
Leisure 23 31 33 32 24
Education 19 2 2 2 1
Other work-related 8 3 3 3 2
Other 6 8 9 7 9
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Transport for London – Older People 132

Older People
Ticket types
Freedom Passes are by far the most common ticket type used by Londoners aged
65 or over; 97 per cent of public transport users use a Freedom Pass [32].
Since very high proportions of Londoners in this age group make use of the
Freedom Pass, only a small percentage of people aged 65 or over use other tickets
such as Oyster PAYG (only five per cent use Oyster PAYG on any form of public
transport) [32].
Tickets and passes used on public transport (January 2015) [32]
%
Base: Public transport users:
All
(975)
65+
(152)
Freedom Pass 21 97
Oyster PAYG 58 5
Oyster Season ticket 20 1
Contactless payment 16 1
Cash/single/return 10 3
Any other Travelcard 7 1
Transport for London – Older People 133

Older People
Travelcards
Very few older Londoners have an Oyster card compared with the proportion of all
Londoners (six per cent of Londoners aged 65 or over compared with 60 per cent
all Londoners). Londoners aged 65-69 are more likely to have an Oyster card than
people aged over 80 (nine per cent for 65 to 69 year olds compared with three per
cent of Londoners aged 80 or over) [12].
Ninety-two per cent of 65 year olds or over have an older person’s Freedom Pass.
This drops to 87 per cent for those aged 80 or over [12].
Possession of an Oyster card or Freedom Pass (2013/14) [12]
% All 65+ 65-69 70-79 80+
Base (15,700) (2,475) (748) (1,113) (614)
Have an Oyster card 60 6 9 5 3
Older person’s Freedom Pass 15 92 95 93 87
Disabled person’s Freedom
Pass
2 - - 1 -
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Note that Oyster card ownership excludes Freedom Passes, Oyster photocards and Zip cards.
Transport for London – Older People 134

Older People
Barriers
We have conducted several research programmes to investigate the barriers faced
by Londoners when using public transport. Our findings from each of these studies
are in general agreement. However, it is worth noting that the issue of barriers is
complex and the specific questions that we ask Londoners may have an impact
upon the responses that they provide. The impact of specific barriers may also be
much more significant for some Londoners than others.
With increasing age, some older people become less active. Reduced activity
levels are often connected to changing lifestyles, expectations and confidence
levels. Accessible transport can help people to maintain a more active lifestyle
[53].
Qualitative research based on in-depth interviews (which included accompanied
journeys 6 ) that we completed in 2009 showed that there are three categories of
barriers to transport use that older people face in particular. These are:
Physical barriers – examples include long distances to bus stops and
connection points, presence of steps, speed of closing doors on public
transport, and jerky movement on buses
Emotional barriers – examples include overcrowding, loud or disruptive
passengers, adverse weather conditions and the fear of crime
Information barriers – many people restrict their journeys to those that they
know well, have reduced expectations that public transport can cater for their
needs, and are unaware of supported travel options such as DaR [53]
6 ‘Accompanied journeys’ refers to journeys made when interviewers travel with respondents to observe and
ask questions about their journey experience.
Transport for London – Older People 135

Older People
Barriers to greater public transport use
When presented with a number of possible barriers to using public transport more
often, the greatest barrier, cited by 40 per cent of Londoners aged 65 years and
over (compared of 59 per cent of all Londoners) is concern about overcrowded
services. A larger proportion of Londoners aged 65 and over also said that none of
the barriers listed put them off using public transport (33 per cent of 65 year olds
and over compared with 17 per cent of all Londoners) [14].
Beyond overcrowding, the next most common barrier identified is about antisocial
behaviour, which is mentioned by 34 per cent of both Londoners and Londoners
aged 65 and over [14]. We address safety and security issues in more detail later in
this section.
Cost of tickets is mentioned by nine per cent of older Londoners as a barrier to
greater public transport use; this increases to 45 per cent of all Londoners [14].
This is likely to reflect the high use of older people’s Freedom Passes amongst
Londoners aged 65 and over.
Barriers to using public transport more often (prompted) (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]
% All 65+
Base (4,005) (1,351)
Overcrowded services 59 40
Cost of tickets 45 9
Slow journey times 41 18
Unreliable services 37 19
Concern about antisocial behaviour 34 34
Dirty environment on the bus/train 28 20
Fear of crime getting to/ waiting for the
24 20
bus/train
Fear of crime on the bus/train 23 20
Fear about knife crime 20 20
Dirty environment getting to the bus/train 18 14
Fear of terrorist attacks 12 11
Graffiti 10 13
Lack of information on how to use public
10 10
transport
Risk of accidents 9 8
Don’t understand how to buy bus tickets 5 4
None of these 17 33
Transport for London – Older People 136

Older People
Safety and security
We use a typology of worry to monitor the perceptions of Londoners with regard
to their personal security while using public transport in London. The TfL typology
classifies people into:
Unworried – reports no general worry and no episodes of recent worry
Unexpressed fear – reports no general worry, but specific recent episodes
Anxious – reports general worry, but no specific recent episodes
Worried – reports general worry, and specific recent episodes
Don’t know
The majority of Londoners fall into the ‘unworried’ category, which means that
they are generally unworried about their personal security in London, and have
experienced no incidents that made them feel worried in the last three months. A
greater proportion of older Londoners (65 and over) are ‘unworried’ than the
average across all Londoners (83 per cent of 65 year olds and over compared with
75 per cent of all Londoners) [14].
Typology of worry (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]
% All 65+
Base (4,005) (1,351)
Unworried 75 83
Unexpressed 11 6
Anxious 6 6
Worried 6 3
Don’t know 2 3
A similar pattern is observed when looking at the levels of concern about personal
security when using public transport in London. Again, Londoners aged 65 or over
are more likely to say they are ‘not at all worried’ than all Londoners (54 per cent
of older Londoners compared with 42 per cent all Londoners) [14].
Levels of concern about personal security when using public transport in London (2013)
[14]
% All 65+
Base (4,005) (1,351)
Not at all worried 42 54
A little bit worried 45 35
Quite a bit worried 9 6
Very worried 3 3
Don’t know 1 2
Transport for London – Older People 137

Older People
Among older Londoners who are worried about their personal security when using
public transport, 31 per cent of 65 year olds or over feel that this impacts
negatively on their quality of life either ‘very much’ or ‘quite a bit’ (compared with
32 per cent all Londoners) [14].
Extent to which worry about personal security when using public transport reduces quality
of life (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]
% All 65+
Base (all worried about personal safety) (463) (123)
Not at all 19 21
A little 29 21
Moderately 19 21
Quite a bit 19 19
Don’t know 1 6
Net: Quite a bit/very much 32 31
A smaller proportion of older Londoners take precautions against crime when
using public transport (32 per cent of 65 year olds or over compared with 38 per
cent of all Londoners). The most common precaution for older Londoners is to
look after their belongings (37 per cent compared with 29 per cent for all
Londoners) whereas the most common precaution for all Londoners is to sit near
other people (34 per cent for all Londoners compared with 24 per cent for 65 year
olds and over).
Older Londoners are less likely than all Londoners to say that they travel with
someone else, use a different route, travel at a different time of day, or avoid using
a type of transport, but are more likely to say that they only take necessities with
them (seven per cent of 65 year olds and over compared with three per cent all
Londoners) [14].
Precautions taken (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]
% All 65+
Base (all who take precautions) (1,507) (442)
Look after my belongings 29 37
Sit near to other people 34 24
Travel with someone else 23 16
Travel at a different time of day 16 11
Use a different route 15 8
Stay aware/vigilant 15 18
Avoid using that type of transport 12 6
Only take necessities with me 3 7
Carry a personal alarm 3 6
Note that responses 2% or below among all Londoners are not shown.
Transport for London – Older People 138

Older People
In terms of actual experiences, the proportion of older Londoners who have felt
worried about their personal security when using public transport in the past three
months is considerably lower than the average across all Londoners (eight per
cent of 65 year olds or over compared with 17 per cent of all Londoners) [14].
Older Londoners who have experienced a worrying incident in the three months
prior to being surveyed were much more likely to have experienced this during the
day than at night (67 per cent of the most recent episodes of worry were
experienced in the daytime compared with 40 per cent among all Londoners who
have experienced a worrying incident) [14].
Those who have felt worried about their personal security when using public
transport in the last three months were asked on which type of transport they
experienced this event. The types of transport where older Londoners experience
worrying events are similar to those reported by all Londoners (47 per cent of the
most recent worrying experiences by 65 year olds and over were on the bus, 27 per
cent Tube, and 20 per cent train) [14].
Crime and antisocial behaviour concerns affect the frequency of travel on the
Tube, bus or National Rail ‘a little’ or ‘a lot’ for just over half of all Londoners (53
per cent). The frequency of public transport use is affected ‘a little’ or ‘a lot’ for a
smaller proportion of older Londoners (39 per cent of 65 year olds and over) [14].
Proportion of Londoners for whom concerns over crime/antisocial behaviour affect the
frequency of their public transport use ‘a lot/a little’ (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]
% All 65+
Base (4,005) (1,351)
Overall: during the day/after dark
Underground/buses/National Rail 53 39
During the day:
Underground/buses/National Rail 23 17
Underground 16 11
Buses 17 11
National Rail 11 8
After dark:
Underground/buses/National Rail 48 32
Underground 37 25
Buses 42 26
National Rail 29 20
Transport for London – Older People 139

Older People
Customer satisfaction
Overall satisfaction
We measure overall satisfaction with various types of transport in London on an
11-point scale, with 10 representing extremely satisfied and zero representing
extremely dissatisfied. We then scale this up to 100). For all of the transport types
listed below, Londoners aged 65 and over give higher overall satisfaction mean
scores than all Londoners.
We have standardised satisfaction ratings, which are shown in the table below.
This allows TfL to apply consistent analysis across a wide range of satisfaction
research.
Average rating Level of satisfaction
Under 50
Very low/weak/poor
50-54 Low/weak/poor
55-64 Fairly/relatively/quite low/weak/poor
65-69 Fair/reasonable
70-79 Fairly/relatively/quite good
80-84 Good or fairly high
85-90 Very good or high
90+ Excellent or very high
Older people aged 65 and over are more satisfied with every mode of London transport compared
with all Londoners. Their ratings are excellent or very high for most modes when compared with all
customers, whose ratings out of 100 are generally three to six points lower. The differences in
satisfaction ratings are most marked for bus, Tube and London Overground.
Transport for London – Older People 140

Older People
Overall satisfaction with transport types – all customers (2014/15) [16]
Satisfaction score (0-100) All 65+
Bus services
Base (14,155) (2,586)
Satisfaction score 85 90
Bus stations
Base (3,626) (346)
Satisfaction score 78 81
Underground
Base (17,634) (1,243)
Satisfaction score 84 89
DLR
Base (13,398) (339)
Satisfaction score 89 93
Overground
Base (5,397) (118)
Satisfaction score 83 90
Dial-a-Ride
Base (2,572) (2,211)
Satisfaction score 92 93
Tram
Base (4,329) (905)
Satisfaction score 89 93
Victoria Coach Station
Base (1,204) (110)
Satisfaction score 82 85
London River Services
Base (2,106) (190)
Satisfaction score 90 93
Taxis
Base (569) (50)
Satisfaction score 83 88
Woolwich Ferry
Base (1,056) (78)
Satisfaction score 79 85
Satisfaction is not shown for Private Hire Vehicles and Night buses due to small base sizes.
Transport for London – Older People 141

Score out of 100
Older People
Bus
Overall satisfaction among bus users aged 65 and over is rated very good or high
at 90 out of 100 (compared to 85 out of 100 for customers overall) [16].
Overall satisfaction with buses over time is consistently high among customers
aged 65 and over, and satisfaction levels are higher than those given by customers
overall [16].
Overall satisfaction with buses over time [16]
100
90
80
70
86
82 83 85 84 84 85
87 85 87 88 89 90
76 77 78 78 77
79 80 79 80 80 82 83
85
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
All customers Customers aged 65+
Transport for London – Older People 142

Score out of 100
Older People
Satisfaction with value for money of bus services is also high among older
customers, with a score of 87 out of 100 compared with 72 out of 100 from all
customers [16]. It is worth noting that older Londoners are generally entitled to
free travel on the bus and as such the base size for satisfaction with value for
money scores is lower than for overall satisfaction.
Satisfaction with value for money with bus over time [16]
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
84
87
78 77
84 86 87
80
82
73
72 72 71
74 74 73
85
69
75
90
66 68
85 87
71 72
All customers
There are some differences with other elements concerning buses. Customers aged 65 and over are
more satisfied with safety and security at the stop (a score of 90 out of 100 for 65 year olds and over
compared with 86 out of 100 for all customers) and time waited and journey time (89 out of 100 for
those aged 65 and over compared with 85 out of 100 for all customers) [16].
Transport for London – Older People 143

Score out of 100
Older People
Drivers of satisfaction
Overall satisfaction with bus services amongst customers aged 65 and over is
influenced by the ease of making journeys and the reliability of the bus. Driver
behaviour and attitude is also one of the top five factors that affect satisfaction for
older customers [16].
Drivers of satisfaction for bus users [16]
All customers 65+
Journey time
Ease of making journey
Ease of making journey
Comfort inside the bus
Satisfaction with info on delays at stop
Time waited to catch bus
Reliability of bus
Journey time
Time waited to catch bus
Driver's behaviour and attitude
Tube
Customers aged 65 and over who use the Tube rate it as very good or high for
overall satisfaction (89 out of 100), a result which is higher than for customers
overall (84 out of 100) [16].
Overall satisfaction scores for the last 10 years show that people aged 65 and over
are consistently more satisfied with the Tube than customers overall [16].
Overall satisfaction with the Tube over time [16]
100
90
84
87
89
87 85
83
87 87 86 85
90
87
89
80
70
60
75 76 78 78 76 77
79 79 79 80
83 83 84
50
40
30
20
10
0
All customers Customers aged 65+
Transport for London – Older People 144

Score out of 100
Older People
As with overall satisfaction, satisfaction with value for money is consistently
higher among customers aged 65 and over than customers overall (in the latest
year this was 91 out of 100 among 65 year olds and over compared with 69 out of
100 for all customers) [16].
Satisfaction with value for money with the Tube over time [16]
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
88 89 89 87 88 87
90 89 89 90 91 90 91
63 64 62 62 61 63 65 67 65 66 67 69
62
All customers Customers aged 65+
Drivers of satisfaction
Our analysis of the factors that drive satisfaction among Tube users shows that for
customers aged 65 and over comfort of journeys, ease of making journeys and
length of journey are all important. These factors are very similar to the drivers for
all Londoners. The table below shows the top drivers of satisfaction for customers
overall and customers aged 65 and over [16].
Drivers of satisfaction for Tube users [16]
All customers 65+
Ease of making journey
Length of journey time
Comfort of journey
Length of time waited for train
Personal safety on train
Comfort of journey
Ease of making journey
Length of journey time
Train crowding
Smoothness of journey
Transport for London – Older People 145

Older People
Overground
As with other types of transport, customers aged 65 and over rate the Overground
as very good/high on average (90 out of 100). This is higher than the proportion of
customers overall (83 out of 100) [16].
Overall satisfaction with London Overground over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score All 65+
(0-100)
Base 2014/15 (5,397) (118)
2009/10 73 82
2010/11 80 86
2011/12 82 85
2012/13 82 90
2013/14 82 89
2014/15 83 90
Older customers are more satisfied with value for money on the Overground than
customers overall (92 out of 100 among customers aged 65 or over compared with
73 out of 100 all customers) [16].
Satisfaction with value for money with London Overground over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score All 65+
(0-100)
Base 2014/15 (5,182) (111)
2011/12 72 88
2012/13 71 90
2013/14 70 93
2014/15 73 92
Drivers of satisfaction
Analysis of what leads to satisfaction among Overground users shows that for
customers aged 65 and over, condition and state of repair, cleanliness and
freedom from graffiti, and information about service disruptions are important
factors. Ease of making the journey, condition and state of repair and feeling
valued are the main factors among all Londoners [16].
Drivers of satisfaction for Overground users [16]
All customers 65+
Ease of making your journey
Condition and state of repair
Feel valued as a customer
Comfort of the train
Information about service disruptions on the
train
Condition and state of repair
Cleanliness and freedom from graffiti
Information about service disruptions given at
the station
The number of trains an hour on this route
Personal safety on the station
Transport for London – Older People 146

Older People
Docklands Light Railway (DLR)
Overall satisfaction with the DLR is rated very high among customers aged 65 and
over and is higher than with customers overall (93 out of 100 among customers
aged 65 and over compared with 89 out of 100 for all customers) [16].
Overall satisfaction with DLR over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score All 65+
(0-100)
Base 2014/15 (13,398) (339)
2009/10 81 88
2010/11 81 90
2011/12 82 89
2012/13 87 92
2013/14 87 93
2014/15 89 93
Older customers are more satisfied with value for money on the DLR than
customers overall (91 out of 100 among customers aged 65 and over compared
with 77 out of 100 all customers) [16].
Satisfaction with value for money with DLR over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score All 65+
(0-100)
Base 2014/15 (12,839) (316)
2011/12 72 89
2012/13 74 91
2013/14 75 93
2014/15 77 91
Drivers of satisfaction
Comfort inside the train, ease of getting on the train and length of waiting time
are key drivers of overall satisfaction amongst DLR users aged 65 and over [16].
Drivers of satisfaction for DLR users [16]
All customers 65+
Ease of making your journey
Comfort inside the train
Comfort of the train
Length of journey time
Reliability of trains
Feel valued as a customer
Ease of getting on the train
Length of time waited for the train
Reliability of trains
Freedom from graffiti inside the train
Transport for London – Older People 147

Older People
Dial-a-Ride
Older customers who use the Dial-a-Ride service rate it as excellent, giving the
service an overall satisfaction score of 93 out of 100 [16].
Overall satisfaction with Dial-a-Ride over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score 65+ 65-69 70-79 80-89 90+
(0-100)
Base 2014/15 (2,211) (134) (606) (1,080) (391)
2009/10 92 90 91 92 93
2010/11 92 87 90 93 93
2011/12 91 87 90 92 92
2012/13 93 89 92 94 93
2013/14 93 91 92 93 94
2014/15 93 90 92 93 94
Satisfaction with various measures relating to Dial-a-Ride are also excellent, with
cleanliness of the interior and helpfulness and courtesy of the driver scoring 94 out
of 100 [16].
Trams
Overall satisfaction with trams is high among customers at 89 out of 100. This is
higher among older users (93 out of 100 for 65 year olds) [16].
Overall satisfaction with trams over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score All 65+
(0-100)
Base 2014/15 (4,329) (905)
2009/10 86 91
2010/11 85 92
2011/12 86 93
2012/13 89 91
2013/14 89 94
2014/15 89 93
Transport for London – Older People 148

Older People
Streets
Although older Londoners give higher satisfaction ratings than all Londoners on
the various types of transport, older Londoners are less satisfied when it comes to
their last walking journey made on London’s streets. Fifty-seven per cent of
Londoners aged 65 and over were satisfied with the streets and pavements after
their last journey made on foot compared to 68 per cent of all Londoners. A similar
pattern is observed for car users; 55 per cent of Londoners aged 65 or over are
satisfied with their last car journey compared with 60 per cent of all Londoners
[34].
Overall satisfaction with streets and pavement after last journey over time – walking
journey [34]
Net fairly
All 65+
satisfied/very satisfied
(%)
Base 2014/15 (957) (255)
2011 64 56
2012 68 53
2013 69 64
2014 68 59
2015 68 57
Overall satisfaction with streets and pavements after last journey over time - car journey
[34]
Net fairly
All 65+
satisfied/very satisfied
(%)
Base 2014/15 (830) (224)
2011 54 55
2012 62 63
2013 57 55
2014 61 52
2015 60 55
Overall satisfaction with streets and pavement after last journey over time - cycling
journey [34]
Net fairly
All 65+
satisfied/very satisfied
(%)
Base 2014/15 (357) (63)
2014 54 45
2015 46 29
Transport for London – Older People 149

Older People
Transport for London Road Network (TRLN)
Satisfaction with the TLRN is reasonable to fairly good. Older users of the TLRN
give a score of 80 out of 100 for walking, 74 out of 100 for travelling by bus on red
routes and 70 out of 100 for driving. Satisfaction levels tend to be slightly higher
among 65 year olds and over for the TLRN than for all customers [16].
Overall satisfaction – general impression of red routes over time [16]
Satisfaction score (0-100) All 65+
Walking
Base 2014-15 (1,254) (72)
2013/14 70 71
2014/15 68 80
Travelling by bus
Base 2014-15 (4,620) (411)
2013/14 69 72
2014/15 71 74
Driving
Base 2014-15 (3,605) (390)
2013/14 67 70
2014/15 67 70
Transport for London – Older People 150

Older People
Access to information
Access to the internet
Londoners aged 65 and over are less likely to access the internet than all
Londoners (64 per cent compared with 92 per cent). The proportion of Londoners
accessing the internet drops considerably as people get older, with only 42 per
cent of 80 year olds and over accessing the internet [15].
Sixty-three per cent of older Londoners aged 65 or over access the internet at
home, 15 per cent access it ‘on the move’ and six per cent at work [15].
Use of the internet (Apr/ Oct 2014) [15]
% All
65+ 65-69 70-79 80+
Londoners
Base (2,001) (640) (212) (278) (150)
Any access 92 64 82 62 42
Access at home 89 63 80 61 41
Access ‘on the move’ 61 15 24 14 5
Access at work 56 6 12 3 1
The top reasons for using the internet are broadly the same for older Londoners
and all Londoners, although usage is slightly lower. The main reasons for use are:
Email (92 per cent Londoners aged 65 or over compared with 94 per cent
Londoners overall)
Finding and sourcing information (87 per cent compared with 89 per cent
overall)
Accessing live travel information (70 per cent compared with 78 per cent
overall)
Maps and directions (76 per cent compared with 84 per cent overall)
Buying goods and services (70 per cent compared with 79 per cent overall) [15]
Londoners aged 65 and over who use the internet are less likely to use social
media than all Londoners (30 per cent compared with 70 per cent all Londoners),
and they’re less likely to use the internet for banking (46 per cent compared with
68 per cent all Londoners) or for watching any video content (38 per cent
compared with 63 per cent) [15].
Transport for London – Older People 151

Older People
Device usage and behaviour
Only twenty-five per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over use a smartphone
compared with 77 per cent of all Londoners. Thirty-nine per cent of 65 to 69 year
olds use a smartphone, dropping to six per cent among Londoners aged 80 and
over [15].
Proportion of Londoners who use a smartphone (iPhone, BlackBerry, Android, other)
(Apr/ Oct 2014) [15]
% All 65+ 65-69 70-79 80+
Base (2,001) (640) (212) (278) (150)
Uses a smartphone 77 25 39 24 6
Ownership of mobile devices is generally lower among Londoners aged 65 and
over than all Londoners with the exception of standard mobile phones (55 per cent
of 65 year olds or over use one compared with 20 per cent of all Londoners).
Sixteen per cent use a tablet computer (compared to 37 per cent of all
Londoners)
Use of apps is lower among Londoners aged 65 and over who have a mobile
device compared to younger age groups (73 per cent compared with 94 per
cent of 16 to 24 year olds) [15]
Using the TfL website
Use of the TfL website is lower among older Londoners than all Londoners. Fortyseven
per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over use the TfL website, compared with
78 per cent of all Londoners. As with internet access statistics, the proportion of 65
t0 69 year olds accessing the site is higher than Londoners from older age groups
(67 per cent of those aged 65-69 compared with 44 per cent of 70 t0 79 year olds
compared with 26 per cent of 80 year olds and over) [15].
Proportion of Londoners who use www.tfl.gov.uk (Apr/ Oct 2014) [15]
% All 65+ 65-69 70-79 80+
Base (2,001) (640) (212) (278) (150)
Uses TfL website 78 47 67 44 26
Transport for London – Older People 152

Older People
In line with the lower use of the TfL website among older Londoners, users aged
65 and over tend to visit the website less frequently than all users. Only 13 per cent
of Londoners aged 65 or over use the TfL website three to four times a week or
daily, compared with 30 per cent of all Londoners [15].
Frequency of visiting the TfL website (Apr/ Oct 2014) [15]
% All 65+
Base (2,001) (640)
Use the TfL website
78 47
Daily 9 2
Up to 3-4 times a week 21 11
Up to 3-4 times a month 20 13
About once a month 17 11
Less than once a month 11 11
Never 20 49
Don’t know/ refused 2 4
Older users of the TfL website are less likely than all users to use the website to
plan a journey (65 per cent of website visitors aged 65 and over compared with 70
per cent of all website visitors), do something in relation to Oyster cards (12 per
cent of website visitors aged 65 and over compared with 20 per cent of all website
visitors) or find out about cycling (one per cent of website visitors aged 65 and
over compared with three per cent of all website visitors) [37].
Main purpose of today’s visit to the TfL website (2013) [37]
% All 65+
Base (28,278) (2,177)
Using Journey Planner to plan a route 68 63
Finding out live travel information 30 32
Finding out about planned works or closures 24 30
Doing something related to Oyster cards or other tickets 20 12
Finding a map 15 16
Doing something related to Congestion Charge 4 5
Finding out about cycling 3 1
Finding out about roads or driving 2 3
Other 4 5
Transport for London – Older People 153

Older People
Accessing travel information in the event of travel disruption
Older Londoners are less likely than all Londoners to obtain real-time London
transport information (77 per cent of Londoners aged 65 and over would do this
compared with 89 per cent all Londoners) [15].
Older Londoners are less likely than all Londoners to access real-time London
transport information on the TfL website (49 per cent of Londoners aged 65 or
over, compared with 64 per cent of all Londoners) [15].
Transport for London – Older People 154

Older People
Working together
Sub-regional mobility forums (SRMF)
Building on the Mayor’s Transport Strategy and Accessibility Implementation Plan and
TfL’s Single Equality Scheme (published in 2012), TfL has established sub-regional mobility
forums in each of the five sub-regions laid out in the Mayor’s transport plan.
To test the feasibility of such forums, we set up pilot schemes in two of the sub-regions
(South and Central) and ran them on a pilot basis throughout 2013.
The boroughs helped to identify older and disabled representatives to participate in their
nearest SRMF, each of which is chaired by a member of TfL’s Independent Disability
Advisory Group (IDAG).
The purpose of the forums is to establish an effective working relationship that will meet
the needs and aspirations of disabled and older people who attend the meetings, as well as
borough representatives and TfL. They also provide a platform for dialogue on strategic
travel and the transport issues that affect older and disabled people across each sub-region.
We do not intend for the sub-regional mobility forums to replace local mobility forums
where they exist, or to replace any formal consultation that we should undertake across the
TfL business. Instead, they provide us with an opportunity to seek the views of older and
disabled Londoners on many travel and transport initiatives that we have planned across
the network.
The pilots were a success and we are now rolling out the forums to the remaining subregions
(North, East and West).
Key issues that have emerged so far from the South and Central regions include:
Pedestrian environment - for example, crossings, roads, pavements
How investment in cycling infrastructure is having a negative impact on the needs of
pedestrians
Signage and Legible London way-finding
Step-free access on the Underground and Overground
Staff training (bus and rail station staff)
Intergenerational issues
Travel information ‘on the move’
Bus and bus stop design
Wheelchair priority area on buses
Transport for London – Older People 155

Younger People
Summary: Younger people
Key findings
Younger Londoners under the age of 25 make up 32 per cent of the Capital’s population.
Among BAME Londoners, 41 per cent are under 25 [2]
Londoners aged under 25 make fewer weekday trips than Londoners overall (2.4
compared with 2.7 for all Londoners) [12]
Walking is the most commonly used type of transport by younger Londoners (99 per
cent aged 24 and under walk at least once a week compared with 96 per cent all
Londoners) [12]
Younger Londoners cite the same main barriers to greater public transport use as all
Londoners: overcrowding, slow journey times and cost [14]
Londoners aged 16-24 are slightly more likely than average to have experienced a
recent worrying episode on public transport [14]
Younger Londoners’ satisfaction with public transport is in line with that given by
Londoners as a whole [16]
Younger Londoners are more likely to own a smartphone than Londoners overall (96
per cent compared with 77 per cent) [15]
Research with younger people
The research that we present in this chapter includes a range of age groups, and
we have noted the specific age ranges covered for each data source.
This chapter focuses on Londoners under the age of 25. However, travel patterns
and priorities vary considerably within this age group as school stage and the
desire for independence changes [56].
Profile of younger Londoners
Londoners aged under 25 make up 32 per cent of the population. Twenty per cent
are aged 15 or under, and 12 per cent are aged between 16 and 24 [2].
Within this younger age group (under 25) the proportion of boys/men and
girls/women is practically equal; 49 per cent are girls/women [2].
Younger Londoners are more likely to be from a BAME group than all Londoners.
Fifty-four per cent of 0 to 15 year olds and 48 per cent of 16 to 24 year olds are
from a BAME group [2].
Younger people are more likely to be in education (54 per cent of 16 to 24 year
olds) and less likely to be in full or part-time employment than all Londoners (32
per cent of 16 to 24 year olds are in work compared with 58 per cent of all
Londoners) [12].
Transport for London – Younger People 156

Younger People
Transport behaviour
Younger Londoners tend to make fewer trips than all Londoners on an average
weekday (2.4 among Londoners under 25 compared with 2.7 all Londoners) [12].
Walking is the most commonly used type of transport for younger Londoners,
with 99 per cent aged 24 and under walking at least once a week [12]
The bus is the next most commonly used transport type for younger
Londoners. Among Londoners aged 11-15, 81 per cent use the bus at least once
a week, compared with 61 per cent of all Londoners [12]
Travelling as a car passenger is a frequently used method of transport for
younger Londoners, especially for under 16 year olds (77 per cent of 5 to 10
year olds and 75 per cent of 11 to 15 year olds are car passengers at least once a
week) [12]
Londoners under the age of 25 are less likely than Londoners overall to use the
Tube (33 per cent under 25 compared with 39 per cent all Londoners) and
National Rail (13 per cent compared with 17 per cent) at least once a week.
However among 16 to 24 year olds, use of the Tube (52 per cent) and National
Rail (21 per cent) is higher than across all under 25 year olds [12]
Forty-two per cent of journeys made by Londoners under the age of 25 are for
education compared with 19 per cent for Londoners overall [12]
Among 16 to 24 year olds the proportion making journeys for work-related
reasons is lower than the proportion of all Londoners making these trips (21
per cent compared with 28 per cent for all Londoners) [12]
Younger Londoners are much more likely than all Londoners to possess a pass
or card that entitles them to free or reduced travel (32 per cent aged under 25
possess a free bus travel pass compared with nine per cent of all Londoners).
This is particularly high for people aged 11-15 (83 per cent possess a free travel
bus pass) [12]
The most common way to travel to school is to walk. Forty-four per cent of people
aged under 16 walk as their main mode to school. This rises to 54 per cent for
young people aged 10 and under [12]. Younger age groups tend to live closer to
school, with 5 to 10 year olds travelling 1.6 miles on average to reach school,
compared with 3.7 miles for 11 to 16 year olds [54].
Barriers
Overcrowding, slow journeys and cost are the three most common barriers to
greater public transport use cited by younger Londoners. This is in common with
all Londoners (65 per cent of 16 to 24 year olds say overcrowded services are a
barrier, 50 per cent slow journeys and 49 per cent cost of tickets) [14].
Young Londoners are slightly more likely to have experienced a worrying event
whilst travelling on public transport in London, in the last three months (20 per
cent of 16 to 24 year olds compared with 17 per cent of all Londoners) [14].
Transport for London – Younger People 157

Younger People
Younger Londoners who have experienced a worrying incident in the three
months prior to being surveyed were much more likely to have experienced this
during night-time (71 per cent of the most recent episodes of worry were
experienced at night compared with 58 per cent among all Londoners who have
experienced a worrying incident) [14].
Customer satisfaction
Levels of satisfaction among 16 to 24 year old customers on the transport network
are in line with all customers’ scores, with very few differences in the satisfaction
levels that we observed [16].
Overall satisfaction with buses is good at 84 out 100. The key drivers of overall
satisfaction with buses are how long the journey took, ease of making journeys
and the comfort inside the bus [16]
Tube satisfaction is fairly high at 85 out of 100. Satisfaction among Tube users
is driven largely by ease of making journeys, comfort and journey time [16]
Satisfaction with value for money is consistently lower than overall satisfaction
for all transport types [16]
Access to information
Access to the internet is almost universal among young Londoners (99 per cent of
16 to 24 year olds access the internet compared with 92 per cent of all Londoners).
The use of smartphones among Londoners aged 16-24 is very high (96 per cent
compared with 77 per cent all Londoners) [15].
Among Londoners aged 16-24, 83 per cent claim to access the TfL website
compared to 78 per cent of all Londoners [15].
Transport for London – Younger People 158

Younger People
Introduction
For many younger people, travel represents a gateway to adulthood, enabling
independence, socialisation and a recognition of maturity. Children may be
accessing transport with an adult, but as Londoners get older they start to travel
more with friends and on their own [56].
Combined with the high proportion of younger people in education rather than
employment, this means that travel patterns can differ from the wider London
population.
Throughout this chapter, we focus on Londoners under the age of 25. Where
possible, we have broken data down to reveal differences by those aged 5-10, 11-
15 and 16-24. In some cases, data is not available to provide this breakdown and
therefore age groups are shown as close to this breakdown as possible.
Note that the differences highlighted between young people in this chapter may
well be influenced by a number of factors other than age, with gender, income,
working status and education all affecting perceptions towards travel in London
and travel behaviour.
Market research best practice imposes a number of limitations when interviewing
people under the age of 16. While some surveys do include this audience (after
parental permission is gained) many limit themselves to those aged 16 or over.
Throughout the report, we have noted the ages covered by each data point
Please note that LTDS data reported in this document does not include results
from children under five years old
Transport for London – Younger People 159

Younger People
Profile of younger Londoners
Thirty-two per cent of the London population is aged 24 years old or under, 20 per
cent are 15 years old and under, and 12 per cent are aged between 16 and 24 years
old [2].
Age profile of Londoners (2011 Census) [2]
% 2011 Census
Proportion who are
girls/
women
0-4 7 49
5-9 6 49
10-15 7 49
16-24 12 50
25-64 57 50
65+ 11 56
While for Londoners in older age groups there is a higher proportion of women
than men, in younger age groups the proportions are more even, with 49 per cent
of Londoners aged under 25 being girls or women and 51 per cent being boys or
men [2].
The main differences between all Londoners and younger Londoners relate to
ethnicity, working status and disability levels. Among younger Londoners (aged
under 25), 51 per cent are BAME Londoners compared with 40 per cent of all
Londoners. With each progressively younger age group, the proportion of BAME
Londoners increases [2].
While 11 per cent of all Londoners define themselves as disabled, the figure for
Londoners aged under 25 is four per cent [12].
Within this document there are two main sources of demographic data: the Office
for National Statistics 2011 Census and the London Travel Demand Survey. The
following table shows the demographic breakdown of Londoners recorded in the
LTDS. Data from both sources are in line with each other. However there may be
differences to specific reported numbers or proportions between sources due to
methodological and timing differences.
Transport for London – Younger People 160

Younger People
LTDS demographic profile of younger Londoners (2013/14) [12]
% All Aged 24 & 5-10 11-15 16-24
Londoners under
Base (15,700) (4,220) (1,417) (954) (1,849)
Gender
Men 49 51 52 52 50
Women 51 49 48 48 50
Ethnicity
White 62 52 47 52 55
BAME 37 47 52 47 44
Household income
Less than £10,000 17 20 21 19 20
£10,000–£19,999 19 21 22 22 20
£20,000–£34,999 20 20 20 19 21
£35,000–£49,999 13 12 12 12 12
£50,000–£74,999 15 14 13 14 14
£75,000+ 16 13 13 14 13
Working status*
Working full-time 47 24
Working part-time 11 8
Student 10 54
Retired 15 -
Not working 16 12
Disabled
Yes 11 4 3 3 4
No 89 96 97 97 96
Impairment affects travel
Yes 10 3 3 3 3
No 90 97 97 97 97
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five and working status does not include under 16s.
All TfL surveys use the Equality Act 2010 to define disabled people as those who define themselves as having a long-term physical or mental
disability or health issue that impacts on their daily activities, the work they can do, or limits their ability to travel
Transport for London – Younger People 161

Younger People
Ethnicity
One of the largest differences in the profile of younger Londoners compared with
all Londoners is in terms of ethnicity. This is particularly evident for Londoners
under 16; 54 per cent of this age group are BAME Londoners [2].
Children aged 0-15 are considerably more likely to be from the African ethnic
group than all Londoners; 11 per cent of children aged 0-15 living in London are
from the African ethnic group compared with seven per cent of all Londoners [2].
Ethnicity by age [2]
Age group
Ethnic group % All 0-15 16-24 0-24
White: total 60 46 53 49
English/Welsh/Scottish/Northern Irish/British 45 36 41 38
Irish 2 1 1 1
Gypsy or Irish Traveller - - - -
Other white 13 9 11 10
Black/African/Caribbean/black British: total 13 19 15 17
African 7 11 8 10
Caribbean 4 4 4 4
Other black 2 4 2 3
Asian/Asian British: total 18 20 22 21
Indian 7 5 7 6
Pakistani 3 4 4 4
Bangladeshi 3 4 4 4
Chinese 2 1 3 2
Other Asian 5 5 5 5
Mixed/multiple ethnic group: total 5 11 7 9
White and black Caribbean 1 3 2 3
White and black African 1 2 1 1
White and Asian 1 3 2 2
Other Mixed 1 3 2 2
Other ethnic group: total 3 4 4 4
Arab 1 2 2 2
Any other ethnic group 2 2 2 2
Transport for London – Younger People 162

Younger People
Employment and income
According to the LTDS, 54 per cent of 16 to 24 year old Londoners are students, 24
per cent are employed full-time and eight per cent are employed part-time [12].
Data from the Census shows that a similar proportion of younger Londoners are
employed full-time. However, the Census indicates more part-time and
economically inactive Londoners than the data from LTDS [2]. This is likely to be
due to the different definitions of employment status and economic activity
between the two datasets.
Census economic activity among Londoners aged 16+ [2]
% All Londoners 16-24
Full-time employment 46 26
Part-time employment 16 18
Unemployed 6 12
Economically inactive 33 44
Younger Londoners are marginally more likely to have a lower household income
than all Londoners. Among Londoners aged under 25, 41 per cent have household
income less than £20,000, compared to 36 per cent of all Londoners [12].
London boroughs
The boroughs with the highest proportion of younger residents are:
London boroughs with the highest proportion of younger residents [12]
Borough
% of younger residents
Barking and Dagenham 36
Newham 32
Tower Hamlets 32
Islington 31
Camden 31
Enfield 31
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Transport for London – Younger People 163

Younger People
The boroughs with the lowest proportion of younger residents are:
London boroughs with the lowest proportion of younger residents [12]
Borough
% of younger residents
City of London 6
Merton 24
Wandsworth 24
Kensington and Chelsea 24
Sutton 25
Bromley 25
Richmond upon Thames 25
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Transport for London – Younger People 164

Younger People
Travel behaviour
Younger Londoners tend to make fewer trips per weekday than Londoners overall.
Londoners aged under 25 make an average of 2.4 weekday trips compared to 2.7
trips per weekday made by all Londoners.
Average number of weekday trips (2013/14) [12]
Average number of
weekday trips
Londoners aged 5-10 2.4
Londoners aged 11-15 2.3
Londoners aged 16-24 2.4
Londoners aged 5-24 2.4
All Londoners 2.7
Transport types used
Walking is the most common type of transport used by younger Londoners (aged
under 25); almost all (99 per cent) walk at least once a week [12].
After walking, travelling by bus is the most common transport option for all
Londoners and for younger Londoners; 61 per cent of all Londoners use the bus at
least once a week compared with 71 per cent of Londoners aged under 25. Bus use
among 16 to 24 year olds is higher, with 80 per cent using the bus each week [12].
Travelling by car as a passenger decreases as younger Londoners achieve greater
independence. Around three-quarters of Londoners aged under 16 (76 per cent)
travel by car as a passenger each week compared with 55 per cent of Londoners
between the age of 16 and 24 [12].
For both National Rail and the Underground, higher proportions of people aged
16-24 use these types of transport at least once a week than all Londoners. For
National Rail, 17 per cent of all Londoners use the service at least once week
compared to 21 per cent for Londoners aged 16-24. For the Underground, 39 per
cent of all Londoners use the service at least once a week compared to 52 per cent
of Londoners aged 16-24 [12].
Transport for London – Younger People 165

Younger People
Proportion of Londoners using types of transport at least once a week (2013/14) [12]
% All
Aged 24 &
under
5-10 11-15 16-24
Base (15,700) (4,220) (1,417) (954) (1,849)
Walking 96 99 99 99 98
Bus 61 71 48 81 80
Car (as a passenger) 48 66 77 75 55
Car (as a driver) 39 8 - - 17
Tube 39 33 11 17 52
National Rail 17 13 3 6 21
Overground 9 8 4 6 12
Other taxi/minicab (PHV) 6 6 4 2 8
London taxi/black cab 5 2 1 1 4
DLR 4 4 2 2 7
Tram (London Tramlink) 2 2 1 3 2
Motorbike 1 - - - 1
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Where there is more detailed information on individual types of transport, we
have included a sub-section below.
Walking
Almost all Londoners walk at least once a week. Younger Londoners are more
likely to walk almost every day (5+ days a week) with 92 per cent of Londoners
aged under 25 stating this compared with 83 per cent of all Londoners [12].
Frequency of walking (2013/14) [12]
% All
Aged 24 &
under
5-10 11-15 16-24
Base (15,700) (4,220) (1,417) (954) (1,849)
5 or more days a week 83 92 91 95 90
3 or 4 days a week 6 3 3 2 4
2 days a week 4 2 3 2 2
1 day a week 3 1 2 1 1
At least once a fortnight 1 - - - -
At least once a month 1 - - - -
At least once a year 1 - - - 1
Not used in last year 1 - - - -
Never used - - - - -
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Transport for London – Younger People 166

Younger People
We asked Londoners how often they walk for various purposes. The table below
compares the proportions of all Londoners and 16 to 24 year old Londoners
making each type of walking journey at least once a week. A higher proportion of
16 to 24 year olds make every type of journey at least once a week, except running
errands [19].
Walking at least once a week by purpose of journey (2015) [19]
% who walk at least once a week to… All 16-24
Base (1,000) (69)
Walk…
As part of a longer journey 77 84
To complete small errands such as getting a
newspaper or posting a letter
86 81
To get to work/school/college 52 78
To visit friends and relatives 49 58
To visit pubs/restaurants/cinemas and other
social places
53 53
To take a child to school 18 25
Bus
Regular bus use is common among younger Londoners. Seventy-one per cent of
Londoners under 25 years old use the bus at least once a week and 40 per cent use
the bus almost every day (5+ times a week) [12]. For some young people in
London, the bus offers a more social form of transport (while not being as
expensive as other social types of transport such as the Tube) [56].
‘We like to get the bus because you can catch up and have a good chat.’ (Girl, 15
years old)
‘We just like hanging out with our friends on the back of the bus.’ (Boy, 15 years
old) [56]
Frequency of travelling by bus (2013/14) [12]
% All
Aged 24 &
under
5-10 11-15 16-24
Base (15,700) (4,220) (1,417) (954) (1,849)
5 or more days a week 28 40 17 53 47
3 or 4 days a week 12 11 6 10 14
2 days a week 11 10 12 9 10
1 day a week 10 10 13 9 8
At least once a fortnight 5 4 6 3 3
At least once a month 10 9 15 6 6
At least once a year 14 12 24 8 7
Not used in last year 7 3 4 2 3
Never used 2 1 3 1 1
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Transport for London – Younger People 167

Younger People
Londoners aged 16-19 are more likely to travel by bus for school or education and
to visit friends and relatives both during the day and at night, compared to all bus
users. However, they are less likely to travel by bus for work purposes than bus
users overall [28].
Purpose of bus journey by age and time of day (2014) [28]
During the day
At night
% All Aged 16-19 All Aged 16-19
Base (weighted) (37,585) (3,574) (9,121) (862)
To/from or for work 53 22 53 28
To/from
school/education
7 36 4 13
To/from shopping 11 8 1 2
Visiting
friends/relatives
9 13 13 20
Leisure 9 11 21 23
Personal business 7 5 2 6
Other purpose 3 5 6 10
Car
Travelling as a passenger in a car is common among younger Londoners. Two
thirds (66 per cent) travel this way at least once a week. Travelling by car as a
passenger is much more frequent among Londoners under the age of 16; 76 per
cent of Londoners aged between five and 15 are car passengers at least once a
week [12].
Thirty-four per cent of Londoners aged 17-24 hold a full driving licence; this
compares to 64 per cent of all Londoners [12].
Proportion of Londoners aged 17 and over with a full car driving licence (2013/14) [12]
% All 17-24 25+
Base (13,127) (1,647) (11,480)
Holds a full car driving licence 64 34 69
Transport for London – Younger People 168

Younger People
Londoners aged 16-24 are marginally less likely to live in a household with access
to a car than all Londoners (59 per cent of 16 to 24 year olds compared with 66 per
cent of all Londoners). Younger Londoners however - those aged between 5 and
16 years old - are more likely to have access to car [12].
Proportion of Londoners in a household with access to a car (2013/14) [12]
% All 5-16 16-24
Base (15,700) (2,371) (1,849)
0 cars 35 29 41
1 car 46 53 35
2+ cars 20 17 24
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Tube
Thirty-three per cent of younger Londoners use the Tube at least once a week,
which is lower than the proportion for all Londoners (39 per cent). Broadly, the
propensity to use the TTube at least once a week among younger Londoners
increases with age; 16 to 24 year olds are the most likely to use the Tube at least
once a week (52 per cent of 16 to 24 year olds use the Tube at least once a week
compared with 17 per cent of 11 to 15 year olds and 11 per cent of 5 to 10 year olds)
[12].
Frequency of travelling by Tube (2013/14) [12]
% All
Aged 24 &
under
5-10 11-15 16-24
Base (15,700) (4,220) (1,417) (954) (1,849)
5 or more days a week 15 11 - 3 21
3 or 4 days a week 7 6 1 1 11
2 days a week 8 6 2 5 9
1 day a week 9 9 8 8 10
At least once a fortnight 8 7 7 6 7
At least once a month 15 17 18 19 15
At least once a year 25 31 44 43 19
Not used in last year 11 8 11 10 5
Never used 3 4 8 4 2
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Transport for London – Younger People 169

Younger People
Cycling
The same proportion of younger Londoners (aged 16-24) as all Londoners
sometimes cycle in London; 18 per cent of 16 to 24 year olds sometimes use a
bicycle to get around London. Fourteen per cent of younger Londoners cycle
regularly (at least once a week) in London [17].
Proportion of Londoners who cycle (November 2014) [17]
% All 16-24
Base (2,192) (281)
Cyclist (sometimes uses a bike to get around
London)
Non-cyclist (never uses a bike to get around
London)
17
83
18
82
The frequency of cycling among 16 to 24 year old Londoners is in line with the
frequency among all Londoners [17].
Frequency of travelling by bicycle (November 2014) [17]
% All 16-24
Base (2,192) (281)
5 or more days a week 4 4
3 or 4 days a week 5 3
2 days a week 3 3
1 day a week 2 3
At least once a fortnight 1 -
At least once a month 1 1
At least once a year 2 3
Not used in last year - -
Never used 83 82
Most Londoners know how to ride a bike (83 per cent of all Londoners can ride a
bicycle). The proportion is even higher among younger Londoners aged 16-24 (88
per cent of 16 to 24 year olds can ride a bicycle) [17].
Proportion of Londoners able to ride a bike (November 2014) [17]
% All 16-24
Base (2,192) (281)
Can ride a bike 83 88
Cannot ride a bike 17 12
Transport for London – Younger People 170

Younger People
TfL has developed a behavioural change model to look at Londoners’ readiness to
cycle or cycle more. Sixty-nine per cent of Londoners classified themselves as
being in the ‘pre-contemplation’ category (defined in the table below). Younger
Londoners are equally likely to be in the ‘pre-contemplation’ stage as the all
Londoners average (64 per cent among 16 to 24 year olds and 69 per cent among
all Londoners) [17].
A slightly higher proportion of younger Londoners are in the ‘contemplation’
phase (15 per cent of 16 to 24 year olds compared with 10 per cent of all
Londoners); this phase relates to thinking about cycling soon.
A similar proportion of 16-24 year olds to all Londoners (nine per cent compared
with 10 per cent all Londoners) are classified as being in the ‘sustained change’
category, meaning that they started cycling a while ago and are still doing it
occasionally or regularly [17].
Behaviour change model of cycling (November 2014) [17]
% All 16-24
Base (all) (2,192) (281)
Pre-contemplation:
‘You have never thought about it, but would be unlikely to start in the future’
‘You have thought about it, but don’t intend starting in the future’
‘You have never thought about it, but could be open to it in the future’
Contemplation:
‘You are thinking about starting soon’
Preparation:
‘You have decided to start soon’
Change:
‘You have tried to start recently, but am finding it difficult’
‘You have started recently and am finding it quite easy so far’
Sustained change:
‘You started a while ago and am still doing it occasionally’
‘You started a while ago and am still doing it regularly’
Lapsed:
‘You started doing this but couldn’t stick to it’
69 64
10 15
3 3
2 3
10 9
6 7
Among younger people who do not cycle, there are several perceived barriers. For
some people aged 16-19, cycling is strongly associated with childhood and
therefore they are keen to distance themselves from this youthful association. For
others, using a bike to travel can limit spontaneity and is less sociable than other
transport types such as the bus. Other possible barriers focus on the cost of buying
and maintaining a bike, and the possibility of getting dirty/messing up clothing
and hair through cycling [57].
A key barrier to younger Londoners cycling, particularly younger children, is the
perceived safety of the cycling environment by parents. This remains a strong
barrier, even when the parent perceives their child to be a skilful cyclist [63].
Transport for London – Younger People 171

Younger People
Cycling schemes
Most Londoners aged between 16 and 24 are aware of Cycle Hire (85 per cent), but
this is a little bit lower than the proportion of all Londoners (91 per cent) [17].
Thirty-two per cent of casual Cycle Hire users (defined as not having a Cycle Hire
key) are aged between 16 and 24 but only three per cent of members are aged 16-
24 [58].
Thirty-eight per cent of younger Londoners say that they are likely to use Cycle
Hire in the future, a higher proportion than Londoners overall (27 per cent) [17].
Expected use of Cycle Hire in future (November 2014) [17]
% All 16-24
Base (1,180) (148)
Yes, definitely/ probably 27 38
Yes, definitely 9 12
Yes, probably 18 26
No, probably not 30 30
No, definitely not 33 22
Not sure 10 10
Awareness of Cycle Superhighways among younger Londoners is lower than
among all Londoners; 42 per cent of Londoners aged 16-24 are aware of the
scheme, compared with 61 per cent of all Londoners [17].
Expected future use of Cycle Superhighways is similar for younger Londoners
(aged 16-24) as for all Londoners; 17 per cent say that they are likely to use Cycle
Superhighways in the future compared to 23 per cent of all Londoners [17].
Expected use of Cycle Superhighways (November 2014) [17]
% All 16-24
Base (1,180) (148)
Yes, definitely/ probably 23 17
Yes, definitely 6 5
Yes, probably 17 12
No, probably not 28 38
No, definitely not 31 23
Not sure 17 22
Transport for London – Younger People 172

Younger People
Cycling education
We manage a number of initiatives that are aimed at encouraging cycling,
particularly for younger Londoners. These include direct support for education
resources such as the Children’s Traffic Club, as well as supporting cycling
initiatives within schools and colleges such as the Junior Travel Ambassadors
programme.
At least 95 per cent of London’s schools have established school travel plans.
These set out how the school can encourage safe sustainable travel among the
whole school community. Around half of London’s schools have signed up to
STAR, the School Travel Accredited and Recognised scheme, which recognises
schools that actively address the challenges of their travel plan. Seventy-one per
cent of participating STAR schools reported that cycling had increased since they
participated in the scheme and 86 per cent said that walking had increased. Most
schools put this down to the STAR programme at least in part [59].
Since 2006, TfL has funded Bike It, an initiative to encourage cycling within the
school environment. Bike It officers now work in more than 100 schools. In Bike It
schools, six per cent of journeys to and from school are made by bike compared
with three per cent at non-Bike It schools [60].
Journey purpose
Travel choices are thought to change through two key stages in younger people’s
lives. The first transition occurs with the shift from primary to secondary
education. Key determinants of travel choices at this stage are to do with
independence and peer influence. For many young people, travel enables
independence, socialisation and recognition of maturity. Younger Londoners aged
between 11 and 15 increasingly travel independently, although they may have
limited knowledge of public transport [56].
When people reach the age of 16 to 18, travel becomes less orientated around
having fun and is perceived as a means to an end, at which point practicalities
(such as cost and speed of journey) become more important in determining travel
choices [56].
Three-fifths of the journeys made by Londoners aged between five and 15 are for
education-related reasons. Shopping and personal business trips are more
common among Londoners aged 16-24 than those under 16 [12].
Among Londoners aged 16-24, 15 per cent of weekday journeys are to travel to
and from a usual place of work and a further six per cent are for other work-related
reasons [12].
Transport for London – Younger People 173

Younger People
Weekday journey purpose (2013/14) [12]
% All Aged 24 &
under
Base – all trips by Londoners
5-10 11-15 16-24
Shopping/personal business 24 16 13 13 20
Usual workplace 20 7 - - 15
Leisure 23 26 22 24 29
Education 19 42 59 60 25
Other work-related 8 3 - - 6
Other 6 5 5 4 5
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Travel to/from school
The most common form of transport to and from school among Londoners aged
under 16 is walking. Forty-four per cent of school journeys are made on foot [12].
Walking is more common among children aged between 5 and 10 than those aged
between 11 and 15 (54 per cent among 5 to 10 year olds compared with 31 per cent
among 11 to 15 year olds) [12].
The proportion of younger Londoners using the bus to get to and from school also
changes between children aged 5-10 and 11-15; 14 per cent of 5 to 10 year old
Londoners use the bus to travel to and from school compared with 45 per cent of
11 to 15 year olds [12].
The next most common form of transport to and from school is the car (as a
passenger). Travelling by car is more common for younger children (28 per cent of
5 to 10 year old Londoners compared with 14 per cent of 11 to 15 year olds) [12].
Main types of travel to school (2013/14) [12]
% 5-15 5-10 11-15
Base (2,371) (1,417) (954)
Walking 44 54 31
Bus 27 14 45
Car (as a passenger) 22 28 14
Tube 1 - 2
National Rail/Overground 1 - 1
Cycling 1 1 2
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
The average length of a journey to school increases from 1.6 miles among 5 to 10
year olds to 3.7 miles among 11 to 16 year olds [54].
Transport for London – Younger People 174

Younger People
Average length of journey to/from school for Londoners (2013) [54]
Miles 5-10 11-16
Average length of trip 1.6 3.7
Ticket types
Younger Londoners have a variety of ticket options available to them:
Under five years old – travel free with a paying adult
Five to 10 year olds – travel free with a paying adult or free with a 5-10 Zip
Oyster photocard. Fares are applied on most National Rail services. However, a
5-10 Oyster photocard can be obtained that enables a discounted child rate
which is cheaper than paying cash
Eleven to 15 year olds – free travel on buses and trams and pay child fares on
the Tube, DLR, Overground and some National Rail services with an 11-15 Zip
Oyster photocard. Eleven to 15 year olds can also travel free on Tube, DLR and
London Overground services at any time as long as they are accompanied by
an adult using a valid Visitor Oyster card or Travelcard ticket
Children aged 5-15 pay child rate fares on the Emirates Air Line
Sixteen to 18 year olds who live in a London borough can travel free on buses
and trams, and also use pay as you go at half the adult rate on all other TfL
services (subject to specific age and full-time education status criteria)
Students aged 18 years old and over receive a reduction of 30 per cent against
adult rate Travelcards, bus and tram passes
Apprentices receive a reduction of 30 per cent against adult rate Travelcards,
bus and tram passes
The proportion of 16 to 24 year olds with an Oyster card is 75 per cent – higher
than all Londoners (60 per cent of all Londoners have an Oyster card). Young
people under 16 are considerably less likely to have an Oyster card (30 per cent of
11 to 15 year olds have one), reflecting the greater opportunities for free or
reduced travel for this age group [12].
Londoners aged 16-24 are more likely than all Londoners to use an Oyster pay as
you go card (67 per cent compared with 58 per cent) [32].
Tickets and passes used on public transport (January 2015) [32]
% All 16-24
Base: Public transport users: (975) (110)
Oyster PAYG 58 67
Oyster Season ticket 20 26
Contactless payment 16 15
Cash/single/return 10 7
Any other Travelcard 7 5
Freedom Pass 21 2
Transport for London – Younger People 175

Younger People
Possession of an Oyster card (2013/14) [12]
% All
Aged 24 &
under
5-10 11-15 16-24
Base (15,700) (4,220) (1,417) (954) (1,849)
Have an Oyster card 60 44 1 30 75
Do not have an Oyster card 40 56 99 70 25
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Note that Oyster card ownership excludes Freedom Passes, Oyster photocards and Zip cards.
Possession of passes/cards entitling the holder to free or reduced travel is higher
among under 25 year olds than all Londoners; it is particularly elevated for 11 to 15
year olds with 83 per cent in possession of a free bus travel pass [12].
This data reflects possession, rather than use of passes/cards for free or reduced
travel.
Possession of pass/card entitling free travel/reduced fares (2013/14) [12]
% All
Aged 24 &
under
5-10 11-15 16-24
Base (15,700) (4,220) (1,417) (954) (1,849)
Free bus travel pass 9 32 7 83 25
Free Tube/rail travel pass 1 2 2 2 1
Reduced bus travel pass 3 6 - 2 11
Reduced Tube/rail travel
pass
9 21 2 32 28
*Note that LTDS data excludes children aged under five.
Transport for London – Younger People 176

Younger People
Barriers
Barriers to greater public transport use
For younger Londoners aged between 16 and 24 years old the issue that they most
commonly say prevents them from using public transport more often is
overcrowded services. This is also the most commonly mentioned barrier for all
Londoners (65 per cent of 16 to 24 year old Londoners compared with 59 per cent
all Londoners) [14].
Following overcrowded services, the second most mentioned issue is slow journey
times. Fifty per cent of younger Londoners say that slow journey times stop them
from using public transport more often, compared with 41 per cent of all
Londoners. Other areas where a greater proportion of younger Londoners report
barriers than all Londoners are:
Unreliable services (46 per cent of 16 to 24 year olds compared with 37 per
cent of all Londoners)
Dirty environment on the bus/train (37 per cent compared with 28 per cent)
Dirty environment getting to the bus/train (24 per cent compared with 18
per cent)
Risk of accidents (14 per cent compared with 9 per cent) [14].
Barriers to using public transport more often (prompted) (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]
% All 16-24
Base (4,005) (299)
Overcrowded services 59 65
Cost of tickets 45 49
Slow journey times 41 50
Concern about antisocial behaviour 34 28
Unreliable services 37 46
Dirty environment on the bus/train 28 37
Fear of crime getting to/ waiting for the
bus/train
24 28
Fear of crime on the bus/train 23 24
Fear about knife crime 20 23
Dirty environment getting to the bus/train 18 24
Fear of terrorist attacks 12 16
Graffiti 10 9
Lack of information on how to use public
transport
10 8
Risk of accidents 9 14
Don’t understand how to buy bus tickets 5 5
None of these 17 9
Transport for London – Younger People 177

Younger People
Safety and security
We use a typology of worry to monitor the perceptions of Londoners with regard
to their personal security while using public transport in London. The typology
classifies people into:
Unworried – reports no general worry and no episodes of recent worry
Unexpressed fear – reports no general worry, but specific recent episodes
Anxious – reports general worry, but no specific recent episodes
Worried – reports general worry, and specific recent episodes
Don’t know
The majority of Londoners fall into the ‘unworried’ category which means that
they are generally unworried about their personal security in London, and have
experienced no incidents that made them feel worried in the last three months.
The proportion of younger Londoners (16-24) who are ‘unworried’ is in line with
the average across all Londoners (73 per cent of 16 to 24 year olds compared with
75 per cent all Londoners) [14].
Typology of worry (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]
% All 16-24
Base (4,005) (299)
Unworried 75 73
Unexpressed 11 14
Anxious 6 5
Worried 6 6
Don’t know 2 2
A similar pattern is observed for each typology of worry with younger Londoners
(16-24) in line with all Londoners [14].
We observed very little difference between the levels of concern about personal
security when using public transport in London between those aged 16-24 and all
Londoners [14].
Levels of concern about personal security when using public transport in London (Jan/
Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]
% All 16-24
Base (4,005) (299)
Not at all worried 42 45
A little bit worried 45 43
Quite a bit worried 9 9
Very worried 3 2
Don’t know 1 2
Transport for London – Younger People 178

Younger People
A similar proportion of younger Londoners and all Londoners take precautions
against crime when using public transport (36 per cent aged 16-24 compared with
38 per cent all Londoners). [14]
The most common precaution for both younger and all Londoners is to sit by other
people (47 per cent of 16 to 24 year olds compared with 34 per cent of all
Londoners). Younger Londoners are more likely to say that they travel with
someone else as a precaution against crime (43 per cent of 16 to 24 year olds
compared with 23 per cent of all Londoners), that they use a different route to
travel (28 per cent of 16 to 24 year olds compared with 15 per cent of all
Londoners) and that they avoid using specific types of transport (20 per cent of 16
to 24 year olds compared with 12 per cent of all Londoners). Younger Londoners
are also less likely than all Londoners to say that they look after their belongings
(17 per cent aged of 16 to 24 year olds compared with 29 per cent of all Londoners)
or stay aware and vigilant when travelling (four per cent of 16 to 24 year olds
compared with 15 per cent of all Londoners) [14].
Precautions taken (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]
% All 16-24
Base (all who take precautions) (1,507) (110)
Sat near to other people 34 47
Look after my belongings 29 17
Travelled with someone else 23 43
Travel at a different time of day 16 23
Used a different route 15 28
Stay aware/vigilant 15 4
Avoided using that transport type 12 20
Only take necessities with me 3 2
Carry a personal alarm 3 -
Note responses 2% or below among all Londoners not shown.
In terms of actual experiences, the proportion of younger Londoners who have felt
worried about their personal security when using public transport in the past three
months is higher than the average across all Londoners (20 per cent of 16 to 24
year olds compared with 17 per cent all Londoners). Younger Londoners who have
experienced a worrying incident in the three months prior to being surveyed were
much more likely to have experienced this during night-time (71 per cent of the
most recent episodes of worry were experienced in the night-time compared with
58 per cent among all Londoners who have experienced a worrying incident) [14].
Those who have felt worried about their personal security when using public
transport in the last three months were asked on which type of transport they
experienced this event. Younger Londoners are more likely than all Londoners to
have experienced the last worrying incident on a bus (65 per cent of those aged
16-24 experiencing a worry event compared with 48 per cent all Londoners) [14].
Transport for London – Younger People 179

Younger People
Crime and antisocial behaviour concerns affect frequency of travel on the Tube, bus or
National Rail ‘a little’ or ‘a lot’ for slightly more than half of Londoners (53 per cent). The
frequency of public transport use being affected ‘a little’ or ‘a lot’ among 16 to 24 year olds
is higher, with 65 per cent saying that their frequency of use is affected a little or a lot [14].
Proportion of Londoners for whom concerns over crime/antisocial behaviour affect the
frequency of their public transport use ‘a lot/a little’ (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]
% All 16-24
Base (4,005) (299)
Overall: During the day/after dark
Underground/buses/National Rail 53 65
During the day:
Underground/buses/National Rail 22 30
Underground 16 22
Buses 17 25
National Rail 11 16
After dark:
Underground/buses/National Rail 49 62
Underground 37 46
Buses 42 55
National Rail 29 31
Transport for London – Younger People 180

Younger People
The use of illegal (unbooked) minicabs
We have run the Safer Travel at Night (STaN) campaign since 2003, aiming to
reduce the use of illegal (unbooked) minicabs. We target our communication
campaigns in this area particularly at young women aged between 16 and 34 [36].
We conduct research every year to monitor the use of unbooked minicabs among
our target audience and we also evaluate the communications campaign to
determine its effectiveness.
One per cent of those aged 16-24 used an illegal (unbooked) minicab to reach their
onward destination on the night that we interviewed them. This is the same
proportion as all of those we interviewed 7 [36].
The future likelihood of using an unbooked minicab stands at 19 per cent for 16 to
24 year olds [36].
The use of illegal (unbooked) minicabs (2015) [36]
% All 16-34
Use of illegal minicabs
Base (651) (554)
Used an illegal minicab to reach onward
destination on night of interview
1 1
Likely to use illegal minicab in future 19 19
Unlikely to use illegal minicab in future 80 79
We have included more information on STaN in the chapter on women.
Road traffic injuries
Despite a spike in the number of children reported killed or seriously injured in
London in 2012, the most up-to-date figures show a return to the declining trend
(from 331 in 2007 to 187 in 2013) [18].
Number of reported killed or seriously injured child road casualties in London over time
[18]
Number 0-15 16-24
2007 331 696
2008 310 665
2009 263 598
2010 250 515
2011 230 510
2012 270 496
2013 187 385
7 The sample for this study comprises people recruited in the queues of popular London late night venues, and
is therefore not necessarily reflective of the London population as a whole.
Transport for London – Younger People 181

Younger People
We have run a number of successful Teen Road Safety campaigns where recall and
awareness of our communications is high. However, the campaigns appear to
have more impact on knowledge than behaviour [61]. Eighty-eight per cent of 11
to 15 year olds recognise that ‘It’s important to stop and think before crossing the
road’, and yet there are some residual attitudes among younger Londoners which
reveal a potentially unsafe approach to road safety. Forty-four per cent agree they
take no notice of road safety, 40 per cent say that they cross the road anywhere
rather than going out of their way to use a crossing and 37 per cent run across the
road [62].
This is confirmed in other research which suggests that young people can often be
distracted by their friends and their belongings (such as phones and headphones)
when crossing the road [61].
The proportion of those aged 11-15 who agree that they are always/usually careful
when crossing the road with friends stands at 73 per cent. However, 36 per cent
say they always/usually look at their phones while crossing the road [62].
Transport for London – Younger People 182

Younger People
Changing behaviours
We have run several campaigns to encourage safer travel behaviours, conducting
research while we developed of these communications. Our research showed us
that to encourage safer behaviour among younger people when crossing roads,
any communications campaigns that we create need an emotional motivator
alongside a directional reminder. Friendship is considered to be a strong
emotional motivator. Our directional reminders focus on road safety lessons from
childhood (for example, Stop, Look, Listen, Think.) [61].
In 2014, we trialled ‘Children’s Traffic Club’ (CTC), a new initiative to improve
awareness and understanding of road safety among younger children. CTC
included a series of DVDs and interactive exercises. Engagement was high, with
94 per cent of parents who were sent the books using at least one of the materials
and 75 per cent using all the materials. At least 70 per cent of parents found these
materials easy to use or interesting for their children [64].
CTC had a positive impact on children’s attitudes and behaviour. Eighty-seven per
cent of parents agreed that their child seemed ‘more aware of road safety and
potential dangers’ as a result of CTC. Furthermore, the majority of parents noticed
an improvement in their child’s actual behaviour when crossing roads. Over 70 per
cent of parents agreed that their child stopped at the kerb to look and listen more,
waited until the safe to cross light went green at pelican crossings before crossing
or pressed the button for the green light more often. Sixty-eight per cent reported
that their child stopped walking or running near roads more when they were told
to [64].
Transport for London – Younger People 183

Younger People
Customer satisfaction
Overall satisfaction
We measure overall satisfaction with various transport types in London on an 11-
point scale, with 10 representing extremely satisfied and zero representing
extremely dissatisfied. We then scale this up to 100).
We have standardised satisfaction ratings which we have laid out in the table
below. This allows us to apply consistent analysis across a wide range of
satisfaction research.
Average rating
Level of satisfaction
Under 50
Very low/weak/poor
50-54 Low/weak/poor
55-64 Fairly/relatively/quite low/weak/poor
65-69 Fair/reasonable
70-79 Fairly/relatively/quite good
80-84 Good or fairly high
85-90 Very good or high
90+ Excellent or very high
We do not collect customer satisfaction data from people aged under 16.
There is very little difference between the satisfaction levels of younger people
and those of all Londoners.
Transport for London – Younger People 184

Younger People
Overall satisfaction with transport types (2014/15) [16]
Satisfaction score (0-100) All 16-24 16-19 20-24
Bus services
Base (14,155) (2,802) (1,501) (1,301)
Satisfaction score 85 84 84 84
Bus stations
Base (3,626) (935) (388) (547)
Satisfaction score 78 78 79 78
Night bus
Base (910) (266) (76) (190)
Satisfaction score 81 80 80 80
Underground
Base (17,634) (3,657) (904) (2,753)
Satisfaction score 84 85 85 85
Overground
Base (5,397) (1,216) (290) (926)
Satisfaction score 83 83 84 83
DLR
Base (13,398) (3,231) (790) (2,441)
Satisfaction score 89 88 88 88
Trams
Base (4,329) (709) (400) (309)
Satisfaction score 89 88 88 88
Victoria Coach Station
Base (1,204) (448) (129) (319)
Satisfaction score 82 81 84 81
London River Services
Base (2,106) (192) (35*) (157)
Satisfaction score 90 89 - 89
* Denotes small base size (percentages not shown in this report for base sizes of less than 50).
Satisfaction is not shown for Dial-a-Ride, black cabs, minicabs and Woolwich Ferry due to small base sizes.
Transport for London – Younger People 185

Score out of 100
Younger People
Bus
Satisfaction among bus users is good/fairly high at 85 out of 100. Satisfaction
among younger customers aged 16-24 is in line with customers overall (84 out of
100 among 16 to 24 year olds compared with 85 out of 100 of all customers) [16].
Satisfaction with safety and security at the bus stop/shelter and safety and
security on board buses is also the same between younger and all customers (86
out of 100 for both younger and all customers for safety and security at bus
stop/shelter, and 89 out of 100 for both younger and all customers for safety and
security on board the bus) [16].
Overall satisfaction with buses has increased over time for younger customers –
from 73 out of 100 in 2002/03 to 84 in 2014/15. This is in line with trends seen
among all customers [16].
Overall satisfaction with buses over time [16]
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
76 77 78 78 77 79 80 79 80 80 82 83 85
73 74 75 74 75 78 77 78 78 78 81 81 84
All customers
16 to 24 year old customers
Transport for London – Younger People 186

Score out of 100
Younger People
Younger customers’ satisfaction with the value for money of bus services is also in
line with the average for all customers (70 out of 100 among 16 to 24 year olds
compared with 72 out of 100 all customers) [16].
Satisfaction with value for money with buses over time [16]
100
90
80
70
60
78 77
75 73
72 72 71
68
66 66
74 74 73
72 71 72
69
67
66 68
65 66
71 72
70 70
50
40
30
20
10
0
Drivers of satisfaction
All customers
16 to 24 year old customers
Ease of making journeys, journey time and comfort inside the bus are key factors
for younger people in terms of bus customer satisfaction scores. Satisfaction
among 16 to 19 year olds is also driven by safety and security at stops and shelters,
while for slightly older customers (20 to 24 year olds), interior information is a
driver of satisfaction [16].
Drivers of satisfaction for bus users [16]
All customers 16-19 20-24
Journey time Ease of making journey Journey time
Ease of making journey Comfort inside the bus Ease of making journey
Comfort inside the bus
Safety and security at stops
and shelters
Interior information
Satisfaction with info on delays
at stop
Time waited to catch bus
Journey time
Time waited to catch bus
Comfort inside the bus
Driver approachability and
helpfulness
Transport for London – Younger People 187

Score out of 100
Younger People
Tube
Satisfaction with the Tube among younger customers (16 to 24 year olds) is
almost the same as for all customers, (85 out of 100 compared with 84 out of 100
all customers) [16].
Satisfaction with safety and security in the station scores fairly highly at 86 out of
100 for both young people and all customers, and safety on the train also scores
highly (88 out of 100 for young people and 87 out of 100 for all customers) [16].
Overall, satisfaction with the Tube has risen considerably among younger
customers and all customers in recent years. Among 16 to 24 year olds,
satisfaction has risen from 74 out of 100 in 2002/03 to 85 out of 100 in 2014/15 [16].
Overall satisfaction with the Tube over time [16]
100
90
80
70
60
75 76 78 78 76 77
74 76 77 77 76 77
79 79 79 80
79 80 78 80
83 83 85
83 82
84
50
40
30
20
10
0
All customers
16 to 24 year old customers
Transport for London – Younger People 188

Score out of 100
Younger People
Satisfaction with value for money of the Tube is lower than overall satisfaction.
Customers aged 16-24 give the Tube a score of 67 out of 100, which is slightly
lower than the score given by all customers of 69 out of 100 [16].
Satisfaction with value for money with the Tube over time [16]
100
90
80
70
60
50
63 64 62 62 61 63
60 61 59 58 58
61
65 67
63
67
65
62
62
60
66 67
64 64
69
67
40
30
20
10
0
Drivers of satisfaction
All customers
16 to 24 year old customers
Ease of making journeys, comfort and length of journey are the three main drivers
of customer satisfaction among younger Tube users. These factors are also the
top three drivers of all Tube customer satisfaction [16].
Drivers of satisfaction for Tube users [16]
All customers 16-19 20-24
Ease of making journey Ease of making journey Ease of making journey
Length of journey time Comfort of journey Length of journey time
Comfort of journey Length of journey time Comfort of journey
Length of time waiting for train Train driver announcements Personal safety on train
Personal safety on train Helpfulness of PA Smoothness of journey
Transport for London – Younger People 189

Younger People
Overground
Overall satisfaction with the Overground is good/fairly high among younger
customers at 83 out 100. This is the same score given by all customers [16].
Overall satisfaction with London Overground over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score All 16-24 16-19 20-24
(0-100)
Base 2014/15 (5,397) (1,216) (290) (926)
2009/10 73 74 76 73
2010/11 80 79 79 80
2011/12 82 81 80 81
2012/13 82 82 80 82
2013/14 82 81 80 81
2014/15 83 83 84 83
As seen in our research results for the Tube and buses, value for money
satisfaction scores for the Overground are lower than the overall satisfaction
score. Younger customers rate overall satisfaction with value for money with the
Overground at 72 out of 100, and this is in line with all customers who rate value
for money at 73 out of 100. There has been little change in people’s perception of
value for money over the past three years, except among 16 to 19 year olds, whose
level of satisfaction has risen by 10 points from 67 to 77 out of 100 [16].
Satisfaction with value for money with London Overground over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score All 16-24 16-19 20-24
(0-100)
Base 2014/15 (5,182) (1,180) (287) (893)
2011/12 72 70 67 70
2012/13 71 70 68 70
2013/14 70 68 71 67
2014/15 73 72 77 71
Transport for London – Younger People 190

Younger People
Drivers of satisfaction
Customer satisfaction among younger Overground users is driven by similar
factors to all customers. However, younger users tend to be more focused on
information at stations than all customers [16].
Drivers of satisfaction for Overground users [16]
All customers Aged 16-24
Ease of making journey
Condition and state of repair of the train
Feel valued as a customer
Comfort of the train
Information about service disruption on the
train
Condition and state of repair of the train
Information about service disruptions at the
station
Ease of making journey
Comfort while waiting for the train
Information about service disruption on the
train
Docklands Light Railway (DLR)
Overall satisfaction with the DLR is rated ‘fairly high’ among younger customers at
88 out of 100. This is in line with the average given by all customers (89 out 100).
The last three years have seen much higher satisfaction with the DLR amongst
both younger and all customers [16].
Overall satisfaction with DLR over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score All 16-24 16-19 20-24
(0-100)
Base 2014/15 (13,398) (3,231) (790) (2,441)
2009/10 81 80 79 80
2010/11 81 81 78 82
2011/12 82 82 82 82
2012/13 87 87 86 87
2013/14 87 87 86 87
2014/15 89 88 88 88
Value for money satisfaction with the DLR among younger customers is in line
with customers overall (77 out of 100 for both 16 to 24 year old customers and all
customers). Satisfaction with value for money amongst younger customers
returns to a higher level after a drop in 2013/14 [16].
Transport for London – Younger People 191

Younger People
Satisfaction with value for money with DLR over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score All 16-24 16-19 20-24
(0-100)
Base 2014/15 (12,839) (3,103) (756) (2,347)
2011/12 72 70 71 70
2012/13 74 71 72 71
2013/14 75 73 75 72
2014/15 77 77 79 76
Drivers of satisfaction
The key drivers of satisfaction for the DLR are very similar for young people (16-
24) and DLR customers, namely ease of making journeys, reliability of the service,
length of the journey time and feeling valued as a customer [16].
Drivers of satisfaction for DLR users [16]
All customers 16-24
Ease of making journey
Comfort of the train
Length of journey time
Reliability of trains
Feel valued as a customer
Ease of making journey
Reliability of trains
Length of journey time
Feel valued as a customer
Length of time waited for the train
Transport for London – Younger People 192

Younger People
Trams
Overall satisfaction with London’s trams is high among customers at 89 out of
100. This is very similar among younger users (88 out of 100). Satisfaction
amongst younger customers has been catching up with all customer satisfaction,
having been slightly lower over the past few years [16].
Overall satisfaction with trams over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score All 16-24 16-19 20-24
(0-100)
Base 2014/15 (4,329) (709) (400) (309)
2009/10 86 83 83 84
2010/11 85 80 79 81
2011/12 86 81 81 80
2012/13 89 86 85 88
2013/14 89 86 85 88
2014/15 89 88 88 88
Overall satisfaction with value for money on tram services is quite good (78 out of
100 for all customers and 81 out of 100 for 16 to 24 year olds). Those in their teens
are generally more satisfied with value for money of trams than those in their early
twenties [16].
Satisfaction with value for money with trams over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score All 16-24 16-19 20-24
(0-100)
Base 2014/15 (2,824) (1,801) (1,175) (487)
2011/12 73 75 81 66
2012/13 77 77 82 70
2013/14 78 79 86 72
2014/15 78 81 86 75
Transport for London – Younger People 193

Younger People
Streets
Three quarters (76 per cent) of the younger Londoners we asked about their last
walking journey in London were satisfied with the streets and pavements; the
figure amongst all Londoners is 68 per cent. However, the difference between
these data points is not statistically significant due to the limited sample size of
younger Londoners in the survey [34].
Overall satisfaction with streets and pavement after last journey over time – walking
journey [34]
Net fairly satisfied/very
All 16-24
satisfied (%)
Base 2014/15 (957) (57)
2011 64 75
2012 68 79
2013 69 77
2014 68 86
2015 68 76
There is insufficient sample to detail satisfaction results with car journey and cycling.
Transport for London Road Network (TRLN)
Satisfaction with the TRLN is reasonable to fairly good. Younger users of the
TLRN give a score of 70 out of 100 for walking, 72 out of 100 for travelling by bus
on red routes and 67 out of 100 for driving. Results are similar for younger and all
Londoners [16].
Overall satisfaction – general impression of red routes over time 2014/15 [16]
Satisfaction score (0-100) All 16-24
Walking
Base 2014-15 (1,254) (125)
2013/14 70 72
2014/15 68 70
Travelling by bus
Base 2014-15 (4,620) (483)
2013/14 69 *
2014/15 71 72
Driving
Base 2014-15 (3,605) (169)
2013/14 67 *
2014/15 67 67
Cycling
Base 2014-15 (1,838) (211)
2013/14 69 *
Transport for London – Younger People 194

Younger People
2014/15 70 72
* Denotes small base size (data is not shown in this report for base sizes of less than 50).
Access to information
Access to the internet
Younger Londoners aged 16-24 are significantly more likely to access the internet
than all Londoners (99 per cent of 16 to 24 year olds access the internet compared
with 92 per cent of all Londoners). Ninety-six per cent of younger Londoners
access the internet at home, 76 per cent ‘on the move’ and 49 per cent at work.
Internet access on the move is considerably higher among younger Londoners
than Londoners overall [15].
Internet access (Apr/ Oct 2014) [15]
% All Londoners 16-24
Base (2,001) (139)
Any access 92 99
Access at home 89 96
Access ‘on the move’ 61 76
Access at work 56 49
The reasons why younger Londoners use the internet are broadly in line with all
London internet users, but there are some notable differences.
The largest difference in percentage points between younger Londoners and all
Londoners in terms of internet use is for:
Playing games (59 per cent of 16 to 24 year olds do this compared with 36 per
cent of all Londoners, a 23 point difference)
Social media and networking (91 per cent compared with 70 per cent)
Watching video content (81 per cent compared with 63 per cent)
Apps for mobile devices (81 per cent compared with 63 per cent) [15].
Transport for London – Younger People 195

Younger People
Reasons for using the internet (Apr/ Oct 2014) [15]
% All 16-24
Base (1,679) (138)
Email 94 92
Social media and networking 70 91
Finding information 89 86
Watching video content 63 81
Apps for mobile devices 63 81
Maps and directions 84 80
Accessing live public transport information 78 77
Buying goods/services 79 73
Education related 64 73
Sharing photos 58 68
Making day-to-day travel plans 67 59
Playing games 36 59
Banking 68 58
Work-related 65 51
Contacting companies for customer service 53 37
Device usage and behaviour
Ninety-six per cent of 16 to 24 year olds use a smartphone, which is a significantly
higher proportion than Londoners overall (77 per cent) [15].
Proportion of Londoners who use a smartphone (iPhone, BlackBerry, other) (Apr/ Oct
2014) [15]
% Base Smartphone ownership
All Londoners (2,001) 77
16 to 24 year old Londoners (139) 96
16 to 24 year old white
Londoners
16 to 24 year old BAME
Londoners
(70) 94
(64) 100
Fifty-five per cent of Londoners aged 16-24 use an iPhone and 37 per cent use an
Android phone [15].
A key reason that those from younger age groups use these devices is to stay connected to
their friends. Thirty-eight per cent of 8 to 17 year olds use devices ‘so they know what
others are doing,’ and 30 per cent use sites for ‘fear of missing out.’[71]
Transport for London – Younger People 196

Younger People
Using the TfL website
Younger Londoners (aged 16-24) are more likely than all Londoners to use the TfL
website, with 83 per cent doing so compared with 78 per cent of all Londoners
[15].
Younger users of the TfL website are more likely to visit the site on a frequent
basis than all users. Among the 16-24 age group, 21 per cent visit www.tfl.gov.uk
on a daily basis compared with ten per cent of all users [15].
Proportion of Londoners who use www.tfl.gov.uk (Apr/ Oct 2014) [15]
% All 16-24
Base (2,001) (139)
Use the TfL website 78 83
Daily 10 21
Up to 3-4 times a week 21 20
Up to 3-4 times a month 20 20
About once a month 17 12
Less than once a month 11 10
Never 20 15
Don’t know/ refused 2 2
Higher proportions of users aged 16-24 (compared to all other users) visit the TfL
website to use Journey Planner (77 per cent compared with 68 per cent), to find
out about live travel information (35 per cent compared with 30 per cent) and to
find out about planned works or closures (29 per cent compared with 24 per cent)
[37].
Main purpose of today’s visit to the TfL website (2013) [37]
% All 16-24
Base (28,278) (3,460)
Using Journey Planner to plan a route 68 77
Finding out live travel information 30 35
Finding out about planned works or closures 24 29
Doing something related to Oyster cards or
other tickets
20 25
Finding a map 15 16
Doing something related to Congestion Charge 4 5
Finding out about cycling 3 3
Finding out about roads or driving 2 2
Other 4 5
Transport for London – Younger People 197

Younger People
Accessing information in the event of travel disruption
Younger Londoners are more likely to seek real-time travel information than all
Londoners (87 per cent compared with 82 per cent). Although they use them
more, they look for similar information sources as all Londoners. The most
commonly used source of travel information by 16 to 24 year olds is the TfL
website (used by 53 per cent compared with 43 per cent of all Londoners), along
with non-TfL apps which are used by 30 per cent of 16 to 24 year olds and 19 per
cent of all Londoners. Staff, announcements or displays at stations are not so
popular among younger Londoners in comparison to all Londoners (47 per cent of
16 to 24 year olds compared with 54 per cent of all Londoners) [15].
Transport for London – Younger People 198

Younger People
Working together
Understanding young Londoners’ travel needs through youth involvement
Our Schools and Young Person Delivery Plan sets out our commitment to engage with
young people and the organisations representing them, to communicate and develop our
programmes.
We engage with more than 30 organisations that work with children and young people
across the Capital. In 2009 we introduced a Youth Panel to include a group of young
Londoners aged between 13 and 25 in our policy-making process.
The Youth Panel runs an annual Youth Participation Day for young people from stakeholder
organisations and we invite them to have their say on TfL’s programmes for young people.
Through interactive workshops, the participants explore the travel needs of young
Londoners and share their views directly with TfL staff.
The Youth Participation Day in November 2013 highlighted the need to continue to
encourage young people to stay safe and act responsibly on London’s roads. It also raised
the importance of travel to young Londoners’ independence, particularly for young
disabled people. This has informed the priorities of the Youth Panel’s 2014 term. The panel
is informing the development of TfL’s Teen Road Safety campaign and meeting with youth
representatives from accessibility stakeholders.
Transport for London – Younger People 199

Disabled People
Summary: Disabled People
Key findings
Fourteen per cent of Londoners consider themselves to have a disability that impacts
their day to day activities ‘a lot’ or ‘a little’ [2]
Ninety per cent of disabled Londoners report that their disability limits their ability to
travel [12]
Disabled Londoners travel less often than non-disabled Londoners (1.9 compared with
2.8 trips on an average weekday) [12]
The most commonly used types of transport by disabled Londoners are walking (78 per
cent of disabled Londoners walk at least once a week), the bus (56 per cent) and car as
the passenger (47 per cent) [12]
The main barriers that disabled Londoners experience and which have an impact upon
their ability to make public transport journeys as often as they would like are often the
same as those expressed by non-disabled Londoners, namely overcrowding and
concerns about the antisocial behaviour of other customers. Disabled customers also
see accessibility-related issues, cost and comfort as barriers to travel [14, 65]
Freedom Passes are the most common ticket type used on TfL services by disabled
Londoners (66 per cent). Twenty-seven per cent of disabled Londoners use Oyster pay
as you go (PAYG), a considerably smaller figure than non-disabled Londoners where
Oyster PAYG is used by 61 per cent [32]
Internet use is lower among disabled Londoners (76 per cent compared with 93 per
cent of non-disabled Londoners) and disabled people are also less likely to use the TfL
website (54 per cent for disabled Londoners compared with 81 per cent for nondisabled
Londoners) [15]
Disabled Londoners are less likely to own a smartphone than non-disabled Londoners
(44 per cent compared with 80 per cent) [15]
Note:
Throughout this report, data relating to disabled people are based on survey and Census
results where respondents have self-defined based on standard questions.
Transport for London – Disabled People 200

Disabled People
Profile of disabled Londoners
There are several sources which aim to quantify the number of disabled people in
London. The primary benchmark source is the 2011 Census, conducted by the
Office for National Statistics. According to the Census, 14 per cent of Londoners
consider themselves to have a long-term health problem or disability that limits
their day-to-day activities ‘a lot’ or ‘a little’, which has lasted, or is expected to last
at least 12 months [2].
TfL also undertakes measurement of the number of disabled people in London on
an ongoing basis as part of our London Travel Demand Survey. This survey uses
slightly different questions (due to the different purpose of the research). Data
from 2013/14 shows that 11 per cent of Londoners consider that they have a longterm
physical or mental disability or health issue that limits their daily activities,
the work they can do and their ability to travel (this includes issues experienced by
older customers) [12].
Fifty-eight per cent of disabled Londoners state that their disability affects their
mobility, 21 per cent have a serious long-term illness and 11 per cent have a
mental health condition [12]. It is important to note, however, that many disabled
people experience multiple impairments.
The profile of disabled Londoners identified in the LTDS varies from that of nondisabled
people and Londoners overall.
Fifty-six per cent of disabled Londoners are women, compared to 50 per cent
of non-disabled Londoners
Forty-four per cent of disabled Londoners are aged 65 or over compared to
nine per cent of non-disabled Londoners. This older age profile of disabled
Londoners has an influence upon many of the findings covered in this report
Sixty-nine per cent of disabled Londoners are white, compared to 61 per cent
of non-disabled Londoners
Eighty-three per cent of disabled Londoners are retired or not working
compared with 24 per cent of non-disabled Londoners
Forty-one per cent of disabled Londoners have household income of less than
£10,000 compared with 15 per cent of non-disabled Londoners [12]
Transport for London – Disabled People 201

Disabled People
Transport behaviour
Disabled Londoners travel less frequently than non-disabled Londoners (1.9
journeys per weekday compared with 2.8 for non-disabled Londoners). While the
main transport types used by disabled Londoners are the same as those used by
non-disabled Londoners (namely walking, bus, and car both as a driver and a
passenger), lower proportions of disabled people use each type of transport at
least once a week than non-disabled Londoners (with the exception of the car as a
passenger where the same proportion of disabled and non-disabled Londoners
travel this way at least once a week) [12].
Disabled Londoners are more likely to walk (78 per cent) and use buses (56 per
cent) at least once a week than other types of transport [12]
Lower proportions of disabled Londoners travel by Tube (16 per cent) and
National Rail (eight per cent). The proportion is considerably lower than for
non-disabled Londoners (41 per cent and 18 per cent respectively) [12]
Disabled Londoners are most likely to use public transport for the purposes of
shopping, personal business and leisure (these trips make up 73 per cent of
journeys by disabled Londoners, compared with 45 per cent for non-disabled
Londoners)
Members of Dial-a-Ride tend to be older than the average disabled Londoner –
81 per cent of Dial-a-Ride members are aged 65 and over, compared to 41 per
cent of all disabled Londoners [30, AB]
Disabled Londoners are more likely to hold an older person’s Freedom Pass (43 per
cent compared with 12 per cent of non-disabled Londoners) and less likely than
non-disabled Londoners to hold an Oyster card (23 per cent compared with 64 per
cent of non-disabled Londoners). Seventeen per cent of disabled people hold a
disabled person’s Freedom Pass [12].
Barriers
We conducted a survey in 2014 to further understand some of the key issues faced
by disabled people travelling on the network. The results show that the majority of
disabled Londoners (61 per cent) would travel more often than they currently do if
they did not experience barriers such as accessibility or cost constraints [65].
Additional journeys that would be made more often without these barriers would
be for leisure and social activities such as visiting friends and family (49 per cent),
entertainment and exercise (41 per cent), social activities such as going to the pub
or to a restaurant (40 per cent) and shopping (34 per cent) [65].
The main issues that affect the ability of disabled Londoners to make public
transport journeys as often as they would like can be summarised as:
Accessibility related (44 per cent)
Cost (21 per cent)
Comfort – incorporating issues such as overcrowding, unsuitable or unavailable
seating (20 per cent)
Availability and reliability (16 per cent) [65]
Transport for London – Disabled People 202

Disabled People
Disabled and non-disabled Londoners alike recognise that TfL has made
improvements to the accessibility of public transport, and 43 per cent of disabled
people think that travelling in London has become more accessible over the past
year [65].
We use a typology of worry to monitor the perceptions of Londoners with regard
to their personal security while using public transport in London. The majority of
Londoners fall into the ‘unworried’ category which means that they are generally
unworried about their personal security in London, and have experienced no
incidents that made them feel worried in the last three months. A lower
proportion of disabled Londoners consider themselves to be ‘unworried’ than nondisabled
Londoners (68 per cent compared with 76 per cent) [14].
In terms of general worry, the disabled people we surveyed felt slightly more
worried than non-disabled people about their personal security when using public
transport in London in the past three months (15 per cent compared with 11 per
cent). Furthermore, among disabled Londoners who have experienced worry,
more disabled people report experiencing such events on a regular basis – 29 per
cent say that they experienced a worrying event five times or more in the past
three months, compared with 17 per cent of non-disabled people who have
experienced worrying events with this frequency [14].
Customer satisfaction
Disabled Londoners’ satisfaction with public transport tends to be in line with
the satisfaction of all Londoners. Disabled and non-disabled bus users are very
satisfied overall (85 out of 100) [16]
Tube satisfaction is also high among disabled users (84 out of 100 compared
with 84 out of 100 for non-disabled Londoners) [16]
Satisfaction with value for money is often higher among disabled Londoners
than non-disabled Londoners [16]. This may be linked to the higher proportion
of disabled Londoners having access to a Freedom Pass [12]
Disabled Londoners are less satisfied with the streets and pavements on their
last walking journey compared with non-disabled Londoners (51 per cent
compared with 71 per cent) [34]
Transport for London – Disabled People 203

Disabled People
Access to information
A significantly lower proportion of disabled Londoners access the internet
compared with non-disabled Londoners (76 per cent compared with 93 per cent).
This is true for all age groups, although not to the same extent. Older disabled
Londoners are considerably less likely to access the internet than younger disabled
Londoners (53% of disabled Londoners aged 65 years old or over access the
internet compared with 90% of disabled Londoners aged 16 to 64) [15].
Among disabled Londoners, 54 per cent use the TfL website. This compares to 81
per cent of non-disabled Londoners [15].
Disabled customers use maps and timetables widely, referring to them both at
home and on the journey, and using the ‘disabled sign’ as a quick reference to
confirm whether or not the station will be accessible [66]. Our research indicates
that disabled customers have a higher reliance on paper-based sources than nondisabled
customers. However, this may be due to the older profile of disabled
customers than non-disabled customers [48].
Disabled customers have concerns about disruptions that non-disabled customers
experience too; however, disruptions can have a greater impact upon disabled
customers because they can face greater difficulties overcoming their effects.
Disabled customers report that they can experience anxiety during disruptions and
that access to reliable, live information is crucial to minimise this [66].
Transport for London – Disabled People 204

Disabled People
Introduction
Many disabled people and those with a long-term health conditions face a number
of barriers to travelling. While many issues are the same for disabled and nondisabled
Londoners, some barriers relate specifically to the physical infrastructure
of public transport, as well as less tangible issues such as reduced confidence in
travelling independently [47].
The Mayor’s Transport Strategy (MTS) sets out the Mayor’s transport vision over
the next 20 years and describes how TfL and its partners will deliver this vision. TfL
is committed to delivering transport services that are accessible to all Londoners
and we continue to invest in improving transport accessibility for disabled people
who live in, work in, or visit London.
To support the MTS, the TfL Business Plan for the next decade includes activities
for infrastructure improvements to make information and advice clearer and
simpler, improvements to staff training, and further engagement with disabled
customers [67]. A major part of this investment includes making a third of
London’s Tube stations fully accessible with step-free access to platforms and
trains by 2021 and better signage. Both our Single Equality Scheme 2012–2015
and our ‘Your Accessible Transport Network’ document highlight detailed activity
to address and mitigate many of the issues over the coming years that our
research has uncovered [69, 70].
Throughout this chapter, we show data for disabled Londoners in comparison to
data for non-disabled Londoners and all Londoners. All TfL surveys use the
Equality Act 2010 to define a disabled person as someone who defines themselves
as having a long-term physical or mental disability or health issue that impacts on
their daily activities, the work they can do, or limits their ability to travel. This
differs slightly to the Census, where the question asked is: ‘Are your day-to-day
activities limited because of a health problem or disability which has lasted, or is
expected to last, at least 12 months?’ [2].
Please note that the differences highlighted between disabled and non-disabled
people in this chapter may be influenced by a number of factors other than
disability, with age, income and education all affecting perceptions towards travel
in London and travel behaviour.
It is also important to be aware that disability is not homogeneous and the effects
of having a physical impairment, mental health condition or experiencing other
barriers relating to the use of public transport are therefore diverse.
Transport for London – Disabled People 205

Disabled People
As part of our work to understand the needs and opinions of disabled customers,
we conduct a range of research programmes, including an accessibility mystery
traveller survey (AMTS). AMTS works with disabled people to assess objectively
and monitor the whole journey experience of travelling around London. It
produces insights which help us to monitor and gain a deeper understanding of
the experiences of disabled people, enabling us to take action, plan improvements
and ultimately improve accessibility. We have included data from this research
into this chapter where appropriate.
Profile of disabled Londoners
There are several sources which aim to quantify the number of disabled people in
London. The primary benchmark source is the 2011 Census, conducted by the
Office for National Statistics. According to the Census, 14 per cent of Londoners
consider themselves to have a long-term health problem or disability that limits
their day-to-day activities, which has lasted, or is expected to last, at least 12
months (7 per cent consider this affects their activity ‘a lot’ and 7 per cent ‘a little’).
This is the lowest proportion recorded for any region of the UK, possibly due to the
lower average age of Londoners compared to those living in other regions [2].
We also monitor the number of disabled people in London on an ongoing basis as
part of our London Travel Demand Survey. This survey uses a slightly different set
of questions (due to the different purpose of the research). Data from 2013/14
shows that 11 per cent of Londoners (circa 833,000 excluding those aged under
five) consider that they have a long-term physical or mental disability or health
issue that limits their daily activities, the work they can do (including issues due to
old age) or their ability to travel [12].
Slightly less than two per cent of Londoners (16 per cent of disabled Londoners)
are wheelchair users (circa 133,000 excluding those aged under five years old) [12].
Transport for London – Disabled People 206

Disabled People
Many disabled people have multiple impairments. The most frequently reported
impairments faced by disabled Londoners are related to mobility (58 per cent)
[12].
LTDS profile of disabled people in London (2013/14) [12]
% All Londoners All disabled Londoners
Base (15,700) (1,821)
Disabled 11 -
Non-disabled 89 -
Disability affects travel 10 90
Ever use a wheelchair 2 16
Mobility impairment 6 58
Serious long-term illness 2 21
Mental health condition 1 11
Visual impairment 1 6
Hearing impairment 1 5
Learning disability 1 7
Other 1 14
Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Note that the table above refers to the impairments experienced by Londoners who
consider themselves to have a long-term physical or mental disability or health issue that
limits their daily activities, the work they can do (including issues due to old age) or their
ability to travel, and that there may be more people with the above impairments that do
not consider them to affect their activities.
The proportion of Londoners who are disabled increases with age. Four per cent of
16 to 24 year old Londoners are disabled compared with 37 per cent of Londoners
aged 65 or over. Age is an important factor behind other demographic differences
observed. For example, disabled Londoners are more likely to be women and less
likely to be BAME Londoners. However, both of these trends appear to be related
primarily to the age profile of disabled Londoners [12].
Transport for London – Disabled People 207

Disabled People
LTDS demographic profile of disabled people in London (2013/14) [12]
% Proportion of
disabled Londoners
Proportion of
category who are
disabled
Proportion of nondisabled
Londoners
Base (1,821) (varies) (13,879)
Gender
Men 44 10 50
Women 56 12 50
Age
5-15 4 3 15
16-24 5 4 15
25-64 47 8 61
65+ 44 37 9
Ethnicity
White 69 12 61
BAME 30 9 38
Household income
Less than £10,000 41 25 15
£10,000–£19,999 28 16 18
£20,000–£34,999 15 8 20
£35,000–£49,999 6 5 14
£50,000–£74,999 5 3 16
£75,000+ 6 4 17
Working status*
Working full-time 8 2 52
Working part-time 5 5 12
Student 3 4 11
Retired 48 38 11
Not working 35 26 13
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five and working status does not include under 16s.
All TfL surveys use the Equality Act 2010 to define disabled people as those who define themselves as having a long-term physical or mental
disability or health issue that impacts on their daily activities, the work they can do, or limits their ability to travel
Transport for London – Disabled People 208

Disabled People
How to read the table
The table above shows:
The proportion of disabled Londoners who relate to each category – for
example, 44 per cent of disabled Londoners are men
The proportion of each category who are disabled – for example, ten per cent
of men in London are disabled
The proportion of non-disabled Londoners who relate to each category for
comparison – for example, 50 per cent of non-disabled Londoners are men
Gender
Disabled Londoners are more likely to be women than men; among all disabled
Londoners 56 per cent are women (compared to 50 per cent of the non-disabled
population) [12].
Gender profile of disabled people in London (2013/14) [12]
% All disabled
Londoners
All non-disabled
Londoners
Gender (1,821) (13,879)
Men 44 50
Women 56 50
Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Men and women are equally likely to be disabled until they reach around 50 years
of age, after which women are more likely to be disabled than men at all ages [2].
Proportion of Londoners by age and gender who are disabled [2]
% Men Women
Age
0-15 4 3
16-24 5 4
25-34 5 5
35-49 11 12
50-64 22 25
65-74 38 41
75-84 57 63
85+ 78 83
This data is based o self-assessment of activity limitations.
Base size not shown as data taken from the 2011 Census.
Transport for London – Disabled People 209

Disabled People
Ethnicity
Disabled Londoners are more likely to be white than non-disabled Londoners (69
per cent of disabled Londoners are white compared with 61 per cent of nondisabled
Londoners) [12].
Ethnicity profile of disabled Londoners (2013/14) [12]
% All disabled
Londoners
65+ disabled
Londoners
All nondisabled
Londoners
65+ nondisabled
Londoners
Base (1,821) (922) (13,879) (1,553)
Ethnicity
White 69 80 61 82
BAME 30 19 38 18
Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
White Londoners are more likely than BAME Londoners to be disabled (12 per
cent of white Londoners are disabled compared with nine per cent of BAME
Londoners). This appears to be related to the older age profile of white Londoners,
as the difference in each specific age category is not significant [12].
Proportion of white and BAME Londoners who are disabled (2013/14) [12]
% White BAME
All Londoners 12 9
16-24 4 4
65+ 37 39
Base: All white Londoners (10,044), white 16 to 24 year old Londoners (1,049), white 65+ year old Londoners (2,004), all BAME
Londoners (5,563), BAME 16 to 24 year old Londoners (792), BAME 65+ year old Londoners (464).
Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Transport for London – Disabled People 210

Disabled People
Employment and income
Disabled Londoners are more likely to live in a household with an annual income of
£20,000 or less than non-disabled Londoners (69 per cent of disabled Londoners
compared with 32 per cent of non-disabled Londoners). This pattern is observed
across all ages.
The difference is particularly clear in the mid-age groups; 62 per cent of disabled
Londoners who are aged 25 to 64 live in a low income household compared with
25 per cent of non-disabled Londoners of the same age. This is likely to be related
to the considerably lower proportion of disabled 25 to 64 year olds in full or parttime
employment (23 per cent compared with 79 per cent among non-disabled 25
to 64 year olds) [12].
Proportion of each age group living in households with an income of less than £20,000
(2013/14) [12]
%
Disabled
Londoners
Non-disabled
Londoners
Age
All 69 32
16-24 60 39
25-64 62 25
65+ 77 57
Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Proportion of each age group working full or part-time (2013/14) [12]
% Disabled
Londoners
Non-disabled
Londoners
Age
16-24 3 33
25-64 23 79
65+ 3 16
Base: Disabled 16 to 24 year old Londoners (63), disabled 25 to 64 year old Londoners (769), disabled 65+year old Londoners
(922), non-disabled 16 to 24 year old Londoners (1,786), non-disabled 25 to 64 year-old Londoners (8,236), non-disabled 65+
year old Londoners (1,553).
Note that working status data excludes under 16s.
Transport for London – Disabled People 211

Disabled People
London boroughs
The London boroughs with the highest proportion of disabled residents are:
Highest proportion of disabled residents in London boroughs [2]
Borough
% of disabled residents
Havering 17
Barking and Dagenham 16
Bexley 16
Islington 16
Base size not shown as data taken from the ONS 2011 Census.
The London boroughs with the lowest proportion of disabled residents are:
Lowest proportion of disabled residents in London boroughs [2]
Borough
% of disabled residents
Wandsworth 11
Richmond upon Thames 11
City of London 11
Kensington and Chelsea 12
Kingston upon Thames 12
Merton 13
Base size not shown as data taken from ONS 2011 Census.
Transport for London – Disabled People 212

Disabled People
Travel behaviour
The London transport network is one of the busiest in the world and on an average
weekday more than 1.3 million trips are made by disabled travellers [68]. The
average number of trips made per weekday by individual disabled Londoners is
1.9; this is below the average of 2.8 for non-disabled Londoners [12].
Transport types used
Disabled Londoners use a wide variety of transport to get around the Capital. The
most common types of transport used are walking (78 per cent at least once a
week), bus (56 per cent), car as a passenger (47 per cent) and car as a driver (26 per
cent). These are also the main types of transport used by non-disabled Londoners
but in different proportions [12].
Disabled Londoners are considerably less likely than non-disabled Londoners to
use the Tube at least once a week; 16% of disabled Londoners do so compared
with 41% of non-disabled Londoners [12].
Disabled Londoners use transport less frequently than non-disabled Londoners.
For each type of transport (with the exception of private hire vehicles) a lower
proportion of disabled Londoners use each type of transport at least once a week
compared with non-disabled Londoners [12].
Public transport generally is less commonly used by disabled Londoners than nondisabled
Londoners; 59 per cent of disabled Londoners have used any public
transport (excluding walking) in the last year compared with 73 per cent of nondisabled
Londoners [12].
Transport for London – Disabled People 213

Disabled People
Proportion of Londoners using types of transport at least once a week (2013/14) [12]
%
Disabled
Disabled
16-64
Disabled
65+
Nondisabled
(All)
Nondisabled
65+
Base (1,821) (832) (922) (13,879) (1,553)
Walking 78 85 68 98 97
Bus 56 62 48 62 70
Car (as a passenger) 47 46 47 48 43
Car (as a driver) 26 28 26 41 56
Tube 16 22 10 41 31
National Rail 8 11 5 18 15
Overground 4 6 1 10 5
Other taxi/minicab (PHV) 8 9 7 6 4
London taxi/black cab 4 3 6 5 2
DLR 3 4 1 5 2
Tram (Croydon Tramlink) 1 2 1 2 2
Motorbike 1 1 - 1 -
Net: Any public transport (bus,
Tube, National Rail, DLR, London
Overground, tram)
Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
59 67 49 73 75
Where more detailed information on individual types of transport is available, we
have included a sub-section below.
Transport for London – Disabled People 214

Disabled People
Walking
Walking is the most frequently used type of transport for both disabled and nondisabled
Londoners. Only 11 per cent of disabled Londoners say that they have not
made a journey by walking in the past year and three per cent say that they have
never made a walking journey [12].
Frequency of walking (2013/14) [12]
% Disabled Wheelchair user Non-disabled
Base (1,821) (317) (13,879)
5 or more days a week 51 20 86
3 or 4 days a week 12 8 5
2 days a week 9 6 4
1 day a week 6 7 3
At least once a fortnight 2 1 1
At least once a month 3 4 1
At least once a year 4 5 0
Not used in last 12 months 11 37 0
Never used 3 12 0
Net: Used in the last 12 months 87 51 100
Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Seventy-eight per cent of disabled Londoners walk at least once a week compared
to 98 per cent of non-disabled Londoners and 51 per cent walk five or more times a
week compared with 86 per cent of non-disabled Londoners [12].
Our annual Attitude to Walking study establishes frequency of walking for specific journey
purposes. There are differences in walking behaviour between disabled and non-disabled
Londoners, particularly noticeable for walking at least once a week to visit social places (35
per cent of disabled Londoners compared with 56 per cent of non-disabled Londoners) and
to get to work/school/college (23 per cent of disabled Londoners compared with 56 per cent
of non-disabled Londoners) [19].
Walking at least once a week by purpose of journey (2015) [19]
% who walk at least once a week Disabled Non-disabled
Base (199) (785)
Walk…
To complete small errands such as getting a
73 88
newspaper or posting a letter
As part of a longer journey 57 80
To visit friends and relatives 42 50
To visit pubs/restaurants/cinemas and other
35 56
social places
To get to work/school/college 23 56
To take a child to school 13 19
Transport for London – Disabled People 215

Disabled People
Among disabled Londoners who state that their travel is limited by being disabled, 64 per
cent consider it either impossible to walk without help (17 per cent) or difficult but not
impossible to do so (47 per cent) [12].
Bus
Buses are the most commonly used type of public transport (except walking) by
both disabled and non-disabled Londoners. However, disabled Londoners are less
likely to use buses than non-disabled Londoners (79 per cent of disabled
Londoners have used the bus in the past year compared with 92 per cent of nondisabled
Londoners) [12].
Frequency of travelling by bus (2013/14) [12]
% Disabled Wheelchair user Non-disabled
Base (1,821) (317) (13,879)
5 or more days a week 20 5 29
3 or 4 days a week 14 11 12
2 days a week 11 8 11
1 day a week 10 5 10
At least once a fortnight 4 1 6
At least once a month 8 7 10
At least once a year 12 15 14
Not used in last 12 months 18 41 6
Never used 3 8 2
Net: Used in the last 12 months 79 51 92
Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Transport for London – Disabled People 216

Disabled People
The physical accessibility of buses is one of the main reasons why they are one of
the transport types most commonly used by disabled Londoners. All of TfL’s
buses, with the exception of heritage Routemasters, are low-floored [74], 75 per
cent of bus stops are now accessible and 95 per cent are scheduled to have been
made accessible by 2016 [22]. Our research also suggests that, due to the nature
of the bus network and the shorter distances required to reach bus stops than train
or Tube stations, approximately 90 per cent of Londoners live within 400 metres of
a bus stop [74].
Fifty-eight per cent of Londoners who report that their travel is limited because
they are disabled consider it either impossible to use the bus without help (23 per
cent) or difficult but not impossible to use the bus (35 per cent). Forty per cent say
that it is not difficult to use the bus and three per cent don’t know or never use it
[12].
Wheelchair users experience greater difficulties, despite all buses being equipped
with low flooring and wheelchair ramps. Fifty-seven per cent of wheelchair users
surveyed say that it is impossible to use the bus without help, and a further 25 per
cent say that it is difficult but not impossible. Ten per cent of wheelchair users use
the bus without difficulties, while seven per cent don’t know or never use it [12].
Wheelchair priority areas on buses
AMTS covers access to the wheelchair priority area (WPA) on buses. During our
2014/15 study period, 96 per cent of wheelchair accessibility mystery travellers
were able to get on the first bus that arrived and 97 per cent were able to reach the
WPA before the bus moved off.
On 27 per cent of journeys the assessors reported that the area was initially
blocked. Unfolded buggies were the main cause of the blockage, identified on 58
per cent of these observations.
In one in five cases (20 per cent) other passengers removed the blockage without
any action being required. In half the cases (49 per cent) the driver intervened
either by talking directly to passengers or by initiating an iBus announcement.
Other journeys were completed by the assessor asking for the space to be cleared
themselves (17 per cent of the time) or as a result of other reasons, mainly
involving sharing of the WPA.
‘There was a pram in the wheelchair space and I had to share.’
‘The passenger did not move their buggy but I managed to squeeze past it into the
wheelchair space.’
‘The wheelchair space was large enough for the buggy to remain where it was
whilst I manoeuvred in.’ [83]
We carried out research in 2012 to understand the key issues for buggy users,
wheelchair users and bus drivers to reduce conflict in the WPA, and how a
communications campaign could help. Our research showed that wheelchair users
experience logistical and interpersonal challenges around the space, with conflict
Transport for London – Disabled People 217

Disabled People
often being indirect before passengers get on the bus. Inconsistent and
unpredictable experiences are a major source of stress and tension.
‘I cannot physically get on a bus where I live because it’s a busy shopping area full
of buggies. What’s the point of a wheelchair ramp if we can never get on?’ [43]
The conflict in the WPA on buses is part of the wider experience of travelling by
bus for wheelchair users [43].
The WPA is a key consideration for wheelchair users when deciding to travel by
bus:
Does my wheelchair/scooter fit in the area?
Is there a buggy/pram already in the area? [72]
‘My experience taking the bus from Earls Court to Hammersmith was similarly
infuriating. The driver initially refused me entry because there was a buggy on
board. I pleaded with him, not only because I knew I could fit on board but because
it was pouring with rain.’ [72]
Wheelchair users on the whole feel that TfL recognises their needs and concerns.
An example of this is the campaign to inform drivers, wheelchair users and other
passengers on wheelchair priority area rules, and how wheelchair users need to
travel on buses [73].
Transport for London – Disabled People 218

Disabled People
Bus journey purpose
One of the reasons why disabled Londoners travel by bus during the day is to
travel for work purposes (28 per cent). The proportion of disabled Londoners who
do this is considerably lower than for non-disabled Londoners (57 per cent). Buses
are used more by disabled people during the day for shopping (22 per cent
compared with nine per cent for non-disabled people), to visit friends and relatives
(13 per cent compared with eight per cent for non-disabled) and for personal
business (14 per cent compared with six per cent for non-disabled). A similar
pattern is seen at night, although the differences between disabled and nondisabled
people at this time are smaller [28].
Purpose of bus journey by disability and time of day (2014) [28]
During the day
At night
Disabled Non-disabled Disabled Non-disabled
% (3,341) (28,680) (673) (7,068)
To/from or for work 28 57 37 53
To/from school/education 5 7 6 3
To/from shopping 22 9 3 1
Visiting friends/relatives 13 8 16 13
Leisure 10 10 20 22
Personal business 14 6 9 1
Other purpose 6 3 10 5
Transport for London – Disabled People 219

Disabled People
Car
While a considerably lower proportion of disabled Londoners have driven a car to
get around London in the past year than non-disabled Londoners (30 per cent
compared with 47 per cent), the proportion who have used a car as a passenger in
the last year is very similar (85 per cent compared with 87 per cent) [12].
Frequency of car use (2013/14) [12]
Car as driver
% Disabled Wheelchair
user
Disabled
Car as passenger
Wheelchair
user
Nondisabled
Nondisabled
Base (1,821) (317) (13,879) (1,821) (317) (13,879)
5 or more days a week 13 10 23 8 7 10
3 or 4 days a week 6 5 7 11 12 9
2 days a week 4 2 7 14 17 14
1 day a week 3 1 4 15 17 15
At least once a fortnight 1 0 1 7 5 7
At least once a month 1 1 2 11 11 12
At least once a year 2 2 3 20 17 20
Not used in last 12 months 18 24 8 12 10 8
Never used 52 54 44 3 3 5
Net: Used in the last 12
months
Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
30 22 47 85 87 87
Disabled Londoners aged 17 and over are less likely to hold any type of driving
licence (including a provisional licence) than non-disabled Londoners (42 per cent
disabled Londoners aged 17 or over compared with 74 per cent non-disabled
Londoners aged 17 or over). A similar pattern is observed among both younger
and older disabled Londoners when compared to non-disabled Londoners of the
same ages [12].
Similarly, disabled Londoners are less likely to have household access to a car than
non-disabled Londoners. Just over half (52 per cent) of disabled Londoners do not
have household access to a car compared to 32 per cent of non-disabled
Londoners [12].
Proportion of Londoners in a household with access to a car (2013/14) [12]
% Disabled Non-disabled
Base (1,821) (13,879)
0 cars 52 32
1 car 38 46
2+ cars 10 21
Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Transport for London – Disabled People 220

Disabled People
Tube
Disabled Londoners are considerably less likely to have used the Tube in the last
year than non-disabled Londoners (58 per cent compared with 89 per cent). The
difference is especially noticeable for more frequent Tube use, where only three
per cent of disabled Londoners use the Tube five or more days a week, compared
with 17 per cent of non-disabled Londoners. Sixteen per cent of disabled
Londoners use the Tube at least once a week compared with 41 per cent of nondisabled
Londoners [12].
Frequency of Tube use (2013/14) [12]
% Disabled Wheelchair Non-disabled
user
Base (1,821) (317) (13,879)
5 or more days a week 3 0 17
3 or 4 days a week 3 1 7
2 days a week 4 2 8
1 day a week 6 2 10
At least once a fortnight 6 3 8
At least once a month 11 7 15
At least once a year 24 13 25
Not used in last 12 months 35 60 8
Never used 7 12 3
Net: Used in the last 12 months 58 28 89
Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Transport for London – Disabled People 221

Disabled People
Sixty-one per cent of Londoners who report their travel is limited because they are
disabled consider it either impossible to use the Tube without help (25 per cent) or
difficult but not impossible to use the Tube (36 per cent), while 28 per cent say it is
not difficult to use the Tube and 10 per cent don’t know or never use it [12].
Wheelchair users experience greater difficulties despite TfL’s investment in
making more stations accessible as part of our Tube upgrade programme. Fiftyeight
per cent of wheelchair users say that it is impossible to use the Tube without
help, and a further 21 per cent say that it is difficult but not impossible. Five per
cent of wheelchair users use the Tube without difficulties, while 17 per cent don’t
know or never use the Tube [12].
An increasing number of Tube stations are accessible, including lifts, tactile
platform edges and wide gates and we continue our work to increase accessibility
across the network [68].
An example of our ongoing work in this area is the recent trial of blue lighting in
the gap between the train and the platform at Baker Street. This lighting is
designed to make the gap between the train and platform more noticeable,
particularly for people with visual impairments. [97]
However, there are still many stations without full step-free access, and we have
planned improvements for a number of these over the next few years. By the end
of 2015/16 financial year, we expect almost a third of Tube stations to have either
step-free access from the street to all platforms (72 stations) or to at least one
platform (14 stations) [22].
Lifts open up many stations to a significant number of disabled people, which of
course creates a reliance on lifts being in service. Malfunctioning lifts can have a
significant impact on disabled people and where they are out of service there is a
need for us to communicate this clearly [76].
Improvements have also been made to trains on several Underground lines, so
that shortly 40 per cent of the Tube network will be served by trains with a high
standard of accessibility [22]. The new S class rolling stock has recently been
introduced, with all Circle line services using this stock from 10 February 2014 and
approximately 50% of the District Line by early 2015 [76].
We are also planning the introduction of the Tube for London, most probably
during the 2020s. The new Tube will have improved accessibility, including stepfree
access from the platform and more space for wheelchair users [76].
Our social media analysis shows that S class trains to have been well received by
disabled people, with comments such as:
‘If you have to be in a wheelchair one day… you’d be grateful for a train like this…’
[76]
Transport for London – Disabled People 222

Disabled People
Cycling
Fifteen per cent of disabled Londoners sometimes use a bike to get around
London, which is a smaller proportion than among non-disabled Londoners
(where 18 per cent sometimes use a bike in the Capital) [17].
Proportion of Londoners who cycle (November 2014) [17]
% Disabled Non-disabled
Base (507) (1,646)
Cyclist (sometimes uses a bike to get
15 18
around London)
Non-cyclist (never uses a bike to get
around London)
85 82
Disabled Londoners are more likely to say that they cannot ride a bicycle (22 per
cent of disabled Londoners cannot ride a bicycle) than non-disabled Londoners (15
per cent of non-disabled Londoners cannot ride a bicycle) [17].
Proportion of Londoners able to ride a bicycle (November 2014) [17]
% Disabled Non-disabled
Base (507) (1,646)
Can ride a bike 78 85
Cannot ride a bike 22 15
Disabled Londoners are slightly more likely to say that they never cycle around
London than non-disabled Londoners (85 per cent compared with 82 per cent)
[17].
% Disabled Non-disabled
Base (507) (1,646)
5 or more days a week 4 3
3 or 4 days a week 3 5
2 days a week 2 3
1 day a week 1 2
At least once a fortnight 1 1
At least once a month - 1
At least once a year 1 1
Not used in last 12 months - -
Never used - 1
Net: Used in the last 12
months
85 82
Transport for London – Disabled People 223

Disabled People
We have developed a behavioural change model to look at Londoners’ readiness
to cycle or cycle more. According to this model, 73 per cent of disabled Londoners
are in the ‘pre-contemplation’ phase, meaning that they have never thought about
cycling (more) or have thought about it but decided not to (higher than nondisabled
Londoners at 68 per cent) [17].
Behaviour change model of non-cyclists (November 2014) [17]
% Disabled Nondisabled
Base (all non-cyclists) (507) (1,646)
Pre-contemplation:
73 68
‘You have never thought about it, but would be unlikely
to start in the future’
‘You have thought about it, but don’t intend starting in
the future’
‘You have never thought about it, but could be open to it
in the future’
Contemplation:
7 11
‘You are thinking about starting soon’
Preparation:
2 3
‘You have decided to start soon’
Change:
2 2
‘You have tried to start recently, but are finding it
difficult’
‘You have started recently and are finding it quite easy
so far’
Sustained change:
8 11
‘You started a while ago and are still doing it
occasionally’
‘You started a while ago and are still doing it regularly’
Lapsed:
‘You had started doing this but couldn’t stick to it’
8 6
Transport for London – Disabled People 224

Disabled People
Cycling schemes
Awareness of Cycle Hire is very high, with 93 per cent of disabled Londoners and
92 per cent of non-disabled Londoners saying that they know about the scheme
[17].
Expected future use of Cycle Hire (people who say that they will probably or
definitely use the scheme) is lower among disabled Londoners (20 per cent) than
for non-disabled Londoners (29 per cent) [17].
Expected use of Cycle Hire (November 2014) [17]
% Disabled Non-disabled
Base (281) (875)
Yes, definitely/ probably 20 29
Yes, definitely 9 9
Yes, probably 11 20
No, probably not 27 31
No, definitely not 44 30
Not sure 9 10
Awareness of Cycle Superhighways is lower than awareness of Cycle Hire amongst
both disabled and non-disabled Londoners. Sixty-four per cent of disabled
Londoners and 61 per cent of non-disabled Londoners are aware of Cycle
Superhighways [17].
Disabled Londoners are almost as likely as non-disabled Londoners to say that
they probably or definitely expect to use Cycle Superhighways in the future (20
per cent compared with 23 per cent) [17].
Expected use of Cycle Superhighways (November 2014) [17]
% All Disabled Non-disabled
Base (1,180) (69) (362)
Yes, definitely/ probably 23 20 23
Yes, definitely 6 5 6
Yes, probably 17 15 17
No, probably not 28 23 30
No, definitely not 31 39 29
Not sure 17 17 17
Transport for London – Disabled People 225

Disabled People
Dial-a-Ride
In 2014/15, the Dial-a-Ride scheme was used to make 1.3 million journeys, the
highest level of usage recorded in its 30-year history [77]. Four per cent of disabled
Londoners are members of Dial-a-Ride 8 [12].
Members tend to be older than the average disabled Londoner – 82 per cent of
Dial-a-Ride members are 65 or over, compared to 41 per cent of all disabled
Londoners . Thirty-seven per cent of Dial-a-Ride members are 80 to 89 years old,
compared with eight per cent of all disabled Londoners, and 20 per cent of
members are 90 years old or over compared with eight per cent of all disabled
Londoners [30].
Dial-a-Ride (DaR) membership by age (2014) [2, 30]
%
All disabled Londoners
DaR members
(Census)
(41,451)
Under 19 7 1
20-34 9 2
35-49 19 5
50-64 25 11
65-79 25 25
80-89 8 37
90+ 8 20
Dial-a-Ride members are more likely to be women than the total population of
disabled Londoners. Seventy-four per cent of Dial-a-Ride members are women
compared to 56 per cent of all disabled Londoners [30, 12]. This is in part related to
the age profile of users. However, evidence suggests that women Dial-a-Ride
members are over represented in all age groups, except under 18 year olds [30].
Sixty-five per cent of Dial-a-Ride members are white Londoners and 35 per cent
are BAME Londoners [30]. There are some differences by borough, with Brent,
Harrow, Newham and Hackney having a higher proportion of BAME than white
Londoners who are Dial-a-Ride members [30]. This may be related to the profile of
people living in each borough.
Membership by inner and outer Londoners is broadly similar. Barnet, Enfield and
Ealing have the highest number of Dial-a-Ride members [30].
8 Not all Dial-a-Ride customers necessarily consider themselves to be disabled.
Transport for London – Disabled People 226

Disabled People
Door-to-door services (Taxicard)
Nine per cent of disabled Londoners and 26 per cent of London wheelchair users
hold a Taxicard [12].
Among those with a Taxicard there is a spread across frequency of use, with 29 per
cent using the card each week and 19 per cent having never used the card or not
used it within the last 12 months [12].
Frequency of use of Taxicard (2013/14) [12]
%
Taxicard
holders
Base (189)
At least once a week 29
At least once a fortnight 14
At least once a month 13
At least once a quarter 10
At least once a year 15
Not used in last 12 months 13
Never used 6
Net: Used in the last 12 months 81
Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Private hire/taxi
Disabled Londoners are slightly less likely to have used a private hire/minicab in
the last year than non-disabled Londoners (49 per cent compared with 58 per
cent). Disabled Londoners are slightly more likely to use minicabs frequently
though when compared with non-disabled Londoners; eight per cent of disabled
Londoners use a mini-cab at least once a week compared with six per cent of nondisabled
Londoners [12].
Frequency of PHV use (2013/14) [12]
% Disabled
Wheelchair
user
Non-disabled
Base (1,821) (317) (13,879)
At least once a week 8 10 6
At least once a fortnight 4 3 5
At least once a month 7 5 11
At least once a year 30 24 37
Not used in last 12 months 32 39 21
Never used 19 18 21
Net: Used in the last 12
months
49 42 58
Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Transport for London – Disabled People 227

Disabled People
The proportion of disabled and non-disabled Londoners using black cabs in the
last year is significantly different (25 per cent of disabled Londoners have used a
black cab in the past year, compared with 35 per cent of non-disabled Londoners).
Wheelchair users are more likely to use a black cab at least once a week than all
disabled Londoners or non-disabled Londoners (nine per cent of wheelchair users)
[12].
Frequency of black cab use (2013/14) [12]
% Disabled
Wheelchair
user
Non-disabled
Base (1,821) (317) (13,879)
At least once a week 4 9 5
At least once a fortnight 3 3 3
At least once a month 3 3 6
At least once a year 16 17 21
Not used in last 12 months 41 38 29
Never used 34 30 36
Net: Used in the last 12 months 25 32 35
*Note that LTDS data excludes children aged under five.
Journey purpose
The purpose of weekday journeys made by public transport varies between
disabled and non-disabled people. Forty-three per cent of weekday journeys made
by disabled Londoners are for the purpose of shopping/personal business,
compared with 23 per cent of journeys made by non-disabled Londoners. Thirty
per cent of journeys made by disabled Londoners are for leisure (compared with
22 per cent for non-disabled Londoners). Journeys made by disabled Londoners
are less likely than journeys made by non-disabled Londoners to be to a usual
workplace (five per cent compared with 21 per cent) [12].
Weekday journey purpose of trips (2013/14) [12]
% of trips Disabled Non-disabled
Base – all trips by Londoners (1,821) (13,879)
Shopping/personal business 43 23
Leisure 30 22
Education 10 19
Usual workplace 5 21
Other work-related 3 8
Other 9 6
*Note that LTDS data excludes children aged under five.
Transport for London – Disabled People 228

Disabled People
Ticket types
Oyster pay as you go is the most common ticket type used on public transport by
non-disabled Londoners. This is not the case for disabled Londoners, due to the
higher incidence of Freedom Passes [32].
Contactless cards are used by five per cent of disabled Londoners, considerably
lower than among non-disabled Londoners where 18 per cent use contactless
cards.
Tickets and passes used on public transport (January 2015) [32]
%
Base: Public transport users:
Disabled
(110)
Non-disabled
(842)
Freedom Pass 66 17
Oyster pay as you go 27 61
Cash/single/return 6 11
Any other Travelcard 8 7
Contactless payment 5 18
Oyster Season ticket 4 22
Travelcards
Disabled Londoners are more likely to hold an older person’s Freedom Pass and
are less likely to use an Oyster card than non-disabled Londoners.
Even when looking only at disabled Londoners aged under 65 (who are therefore
not eligible for the older person’s Freedom Pass), Oyster card ownership is lower
than among non-disabled Londoners [12]. This may be partly explained by the use
of disabled person’s Freedom Passes.
Ticket types held (2013/14) [12]
% Disabled
(all)
Disabled

Disabled People
Barriers
The majority of disabled Londoners (61 per cent) would travel more often than
they currently do if they did not experience barriers such as access or cost
constraints [65].
Additional journeys that would be made more often if there were no barriers
would be for leisure and social activities, such as visiting friends and family (49 per
cent), entertainment and exercise (41 per cent), social activities such as going to
the pub or to a restaurant (40 per cent) and shopping (34 per cent) [65].
Our research evidence suggests that Londoners with mental health conditions,
mobility impairments and long-term illnesses are the most likely to want to travel
more often (76 per cent, 73 per cent and 73 per cent respectively would like to
make more journeys if they did not face barriers) [65].
Barriers to greater public transport use
We have carried out several research programmes to investigate the barriers that
are faced by Londoners when using public transport. Findings from each of these
studies are in general agreement. However, it is worth noting that the issue of
barriers is complex and that the specific questions that we ask Londoners in our
research may have had an impact on the response provided. The impact of specific
barriers may also be much more significant for some Londoners than others.
Many of the issues faced by disabled Londoners when travelling by public
transport are common to both disabled and non-disabled Londoners, particularly
overcrowded services, which is the barrier that is mentioned most frequently by
both disabled and non-disabled Londoners [14].
Transport for London – Disabled People 230

Disabled People
Barriers to using public transport more often (prompted) (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]
% Disabled Non-disabled
Base (570) (3,385)
Overcrowded services 58 59
Concern about antisocial behaviour of others 38 34
Cost of tickets 36 46
Slow journey times 32 42
Unreliable services 31 37
Fear of crime getting to and waiting for the
29 23
bus/train (ie robbery, assault or pickpocketing)
Fear of crime on the bus/train (ie robbery, assault
27 22
or pickpocketing)
Fear about knife crime 25 20
Dirty environment on the bus/train 24 28
Dirty environment getting to the bus/train 17 18
Risk of accidents 15 8
Fear of terrorist attacks 15 12
Graffiti 14 10
Lack of information about how to use public
12 10
transport services
Don't understand how to buy bus tickets 5 5
None of these 19 17
Although cost of tickets (36 per cent), slow journey times (32 per cent) and
unreliable services (31 per cent) are among the most significant barriers
mentioned by disabled Londoners, the proportion who mention these factors is
significantly lower than the proportion of non-disabled Londoners affected by
these factors (46 per cent, 42 per cent and 37 per cent respectively for each of
these factors) [14].
For most other factors covered in the survey, disabled Londoners are more likely
to say that they are impacted by each barrier compared to non-disabled
Londoners [14].
It would be easy to presume that the older age profile of disabled Londoners has a
significant impact upon the barriers faced and that the increased barriers are
related to age. However, when comparing the responses of disabled Londoners to
all Londoners aged 65 years old or over this hypothesis does not hold true [14].
Disabled Londoners are more likely to mention all barriers more often than older
Londoners (65 or older). Thirty-three per cent of 65 year olds or over say that none
of the barriers covered in the survey apply to their increased use of public
transport, whereas amongst disabled Londoners the figure is 19 per cent [14].
Transport for London – Disabled People 231

Disabled People
We have carried out additional research among disabled customers to identify
specifically the barriers faced when using public transport in London. The main
issues that we have identified from this study which impact upon the ability of
disabled Londoners to make public transport journeys as often as they would like
can be summarised as [65]:
Accessibility-related (44 per cent)
Cost (21 per cent)
Comfort – incorporating issues such as overcrowding, unsuitable or unavailable
seating (20 per cent)
Availability and reliability (16 per cent)
Attitudes or behaviour of other customers (seven per cent)
Safety (six per cent)
Communication issues and attitude or behaviour of staff (five per cent)
Information (four per cent)
Although based upon a small number of interviews, it appears that visually
impaired and hearing-impaired Londoners are more likely than other disabled
Londoners to say that improvements to information would enable them to make
more journeys (26 per cent and 33 per cent respectively – although note that the
base size is relatively small) [65].
Many disabled Londoners find travelling by public transport stressful (45 per cent)
[65] and there is evidence that while many of the issues are common between
disabled and non-disabled Londoners, disabled Londoners are more likely to
experience worry or anxiety when problems occur [66, 14].
Among disabled Londoners who work, 46 per cent agree that the transport
network affects their ability to get to work. This could be improved if the disabled
customer were able to get a seat (43 per cent), if the system were less crowded (38
per cent) and if it were more affordable (29 per cent) [65].
Improvements
In 2014, 43 per cent of disabled people stated that ‘travelling in London has
become more accessible recently’ [65]. There has also been recognition by many
people on social media that improvements in the accessibility and information
that was provided to disabled Londoners during the London 2012 Olympic and
Paralympic Games has had a legacy effect [52].
‘To its credit, in the last decade, TfL has put a lot of investment into improving the
Underground and making it much more accessible…I feel that London hosting the
2012 Games focused energy into making London’s transport infrastructure fit for a
leading city. TfL’s work, combined with my experiences at Trailblazers, pushed me
into deciding to give the Underground a go.’
Muscular Dystrophy Campaign, Blog
Transport for London – Disabled People 232

Disabled People
TfL has also introduced a number of improvements to street infrastructure. More
than half (57 per cent) of disabled Londoners are aware of at least one of these
improvements [65].
Awareness of infrastructure changes (2013) [65]
% Disabled
Base (381)
Any one of the following 57
Improvements to road crossings including pedestrian
Countdown systems
33
Boarding ramps to allow access from platform to train at
Tube stations
31
Online information about accessibility 20
Real time information on transport service such as whether
lifts are in service
18
Travel mentoring schemes to equip people with the skills and
confidence to travel independently
11
Videos to show how to use various features of the transport
system such as bus boarding ramps
10
Physical accessibility as a barrier
Although there has been a real improvement in accessibility across public
transport in recent years, particularly in terms of the number of Tube stations
which are now accessible, 62 per cent of disabled Londoners 9 find it difficult to use
the Tube and 58 per cent find it hard to use the bus.
Difficulties accessing public transport (2013/ 2014) [12]
% Buses Tube DLR Tram
Disabled Impossible without help 23 25 19 18
Londoners Difficult (but not impossible) 35 36 25 21
(base = 1,654) Net: Impossible/difficult 58 62 43 39
Not difficult to use 40 28 29 28
Don't know/never use 3 10 27 33
Wheelchair
users
(base = 317)
Impossible without help 57 58 47 46
Difficult (but not impossible) 25 21 17 14
Net: Impossible/difficult 82 78 63 60
Not difficult to use 10 5 4 6
Don't know/never use 7 17 32 35
*Note that LTDS data excludes children aged under five.
Base: Londoners who report that travel is limited by being disabled.
Qualitatively, customers report needing a much greater number of stations to be
accessible before the network is opened up sufficiently for them to travel within
London by Tube [66].
9 Londoners who say that they have a long-term health problem/disability that limits travel.
Transport for London – Disabled People 233

Disabled People
Disabled customers also report issues when travelling by bus due to buses not
stopping or not being able to stop in a position for them to easily get off the bus
[65].
Buses not stopping to let customers on or off is an issue that both disabled and
non-disabled Londoners report through complaints. The impact upon disabled
Londoners can be greater than for non-disabled customers however, and can
cause anxiety and concern. There are many issues, including some that are specific
to the type of barriers individual disabled Londoners face:
Visually impaired customers may not see the bus coming, or may not realise
that there is a line of buses and that their bus is not stationed at the bus stop.
Visually impaired customers may also not know when to press the call bell to
stop the bus
Hearing impaired customers may not hear the bus arriving
Physically impaired customers may not be able to move quickly enough down
a line of buses
Wheelchair users may not be able to access the wheelchair priority area due to
use of other wheelchair users or customers with buggies/large luggage
Many disabled people and bus drivers report that the drivers ‘try to do the right
thing’, but this remains an area for more effective bus driver training [84].
Physical accessibility is also an issue for disabled Londoners when making journeys
by walking or when using mobility aids. Sixty-five per cent of disabled Londoners
say that they face issues relating to the condition of pavements and 43 per cent
obstacles on the pavement [65].
Differences among disabled people
The experience that disabled people have and their cited barriers related to public
transport vary. Barriers can be very specific and people have varied experiences
and attitudes when it comes to travelling in London [78].
While every customer’s individual situation makes a difference, we have found
variations according to the broad type of impairment that people are living with.
Londoners with a mental health condition tend to have the greatest latent
demand for travel, as 76 per cent of this group say they would make more journeys
if they did not experience barriers [65].
Transport for London – Disabled People 234

Disabled People
Differences between disabled people (2013) [65]
%
All disabled people
(base=381)
Mental health conditions
(base=55)
Long-term health conditions
(base=123)
Mobility
(base=265)
Wish to travel
more (if no
barriers)
Find
travelling
stressful
Believe
travelling has
got easier in
last year
61 45 43
76 51 33
72 54 33
62 46 41
Visually impaired and hearing impaired customer data breaks are not included in the above table due to limited sample sizes
NB the total figure for all disabled people is lower than each category listed in the table. This is because the survey included a
wide range of impairments, and a number of respondents recorded multiple impairments.
Customers with a hearing impairment tend to be the most likely to experience
stress while travelling, but are also the most likely to recognise improvements
made by TfL to the transport system over the past year [65]. Qualitative feedback
from hearing-impaired customers provides further evidence of the high stress
levels among these customers who often report being worried that they will be the
last to know of changes to the service [66].
Factors that can have physical symptoms (such as discomfort, pain or tiredness) or
emotional impacts (lowered confidence, anxiety or frustration) are often perceived
as barriers to greater public transport use among disabled Londoners. Barriers can
affect transport use in a number of ways, such as affecting choice of transport, the
time of day at which journeys are made and how journeys are planned [79].
Travelling by bus for mobility scooter users
Mobility scooter users face unique challenges when using public transport. We
carried out research to develop a policy on travelling by bus for mobility scooter
users. Our research results identified the minimum space requirements needed for
a range of mobility scooters. We also found that users differ in their ability to
manoeuvre their scooter and therefore this may affect the amount of space
required. Due to the need for users to drive into and out of the bus while facing
forwards, it is important that enough space is available within the bus for scooters
to be turned 360 degrees [80].
We have introduced a mobility aid recognition scheme. The scheme is primarily
aimed at customers with mobility scooters, but may also be used by people with
manual or powered wheelchairs, mobility walkers or shopping trolleys, where
these are used as a mobility aid. People who apply for the scheme receive a home
visit to assess their mobility aid and are then given a Mobility Aid Card. This can be
shown to the bus driver to let them know that the device is suitable to travel on a
bus.
Transport for London – Disabled People 235

Disabled People
Most users (85 per cent) are happy with the Mobility Aid Card and say that it has
increased their confidence while using the bus (72 per cent) [81].
‘By giving me the Mobility Aid Card I knew full well I was going to be okay and I
had the proof by having the card.’
‘It gets me out a bit further than I would normally get out because of my disability.
I can travel a bit further.’ [81]
Disabled teenagers
Our research with disabled teenagers identified that many of their perceived
barriers to greater public transport use are also experienced by disabled adults and
the wider London population [87]. However, using public transport is seen as part
of teenage life and therefore it is both practically and symbolically significant to
younger disabled Londoners. It is thought that personality, in many cases, more so
than impairments, is important in determining attitudes and behaviour towards
public transport use among disabled teenagers [82].
As part of this research, many of the disabled teenagers acknowledged that some
solutions to increase transport accessibility are harder to implement than others
(such as ensuring that the Tube is 100 per cent accessible). Solutions that we
believe to be more achievable include staff training to ensure that staff
acknowledge (and enforce) policies, promotion of travel planning services and
ensuring that information on accessibility is kept up-to-date [82].
Safety and security
We use a typology of worry to monitor the perceptions of Londoners with regard
to their personal security while using public transport in London. The typology
classifies people into:
Unworried – reports no general worry and no episodes of recent worry
Unexpressed fear – reports no general worry, but specific recent episodes
Anxious – reports general worry, but no specific recent episodes
Worried – reports general worry, and specific recent episodes
Don’t know
The majority of Londoners fall into the ‘unworried’ category, which means that
they are generally unworried about their personal security in London, and have
experienced no incidents that made them feel worried in the last three months. A
lower proportion of disabled Londoners are considered ‘unworried’ than nondisabled
Londoners (68 per cent compared with 76 per cent) [14].
Transport for London – Disabled People 236

Disabled People
Typology of worry (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]
% Disabled Non-disabled
Base 570 3,385
Unworried 68 76
Unexpressed 13 11
Anxious 8 6
Worried 7 5
Don’t know 5 2
Disabled Londoners are less likely than non-disabled Londoners to say that they
are ‘not at all worried’ about personal security while using public transport in
London, although they are no more likely to report that they are ‘very worried’
[14].
When combining very and quite a bit worried, disabled people felt slightly more
worried than non-disabled people about their personal security when using public
transport in London in the past three months (15 per cent compared with 11 per
cent). Furthermore, among disabled Londoners who have felt worried, more
disabled people report experiencing such worry on a regular basis - 30 per cent say
that they experienced a worrying event five times or more in the past three
months, compared with 16 per cent of non-disabled people who have experienced
worrying events experiencing them with this frequency [14].
Levels of concern about personal security when using public transport in London
(Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct2014) [14]
% Disabled
Nondisabled
Base (570) (3,385)
Not at all worried 36 43
A little bit worried 46 45
Quite worried 11 8
Very worried 4 3
Don’t know 4 1
Those who have felt worried about their personal security when using public
transport in the last three months were asked on which type of transport they
experienced this event. Disabled Londoners are much more likely to have
experienced their last worrying event on the bus than non-disabled Londoners (63
per cent compared with 46 per cent) and are less likely to have experienced it on
the Tube (24 per cent compared with 31 per cent) or train (9 per cent compared
with 20 per cent). It is important to note that this reflects the considerably higher
use of buses by disabled Londoners compared with Tube or train [14].
Transport for London – Disabled People 237

Disabled People
Crime and antisocial behaviour concerns affect the frequency of travel during the
day ‘a lot/a little’ for disabled and non-disabled Londoners. During the daytime
this is more the case for disabled Londoners than non-disabled Londoners (23 per
cent disabled Londoners using the bus during the day compared with 17 per cent
for non-disabled Londoners). However, concern among these two groups
becomes similar when travelling at night (40 per cent compared with 43 per cent
for non-disabled Londoners travelling by bus at night) [14].
Proportion of Londoners for whom concerns over crime/antisocial behaviour affect the
frequency of their public transport use ‘a lot/a little’ (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]
% All Disabled Nondisabled
Base (4,005) (570) (3,385)
Overall: During the day/after dark
Underground/buses/National Rail 53 51 53
During the day:
Underground/buses/National Rail 23 31 22
Underground 16 22 15
Buses 17 23 17
National Rail 11 15 11
After dark:
Underground/buses/National Rail 48 44 49
Underground 37 32 37
Buses 42 40 43
National Rail 29 27 30
Transport for London – Disabled People 238

Disabled People
Customer satisfaction
We measure overall satisfaction with various transport types in London on an 11-
point scale, with 10 representing extremely satisfied and zero representing
extremely dissatisfied. We then scale this up to 100.
We have standardised satisfaction ratings, as laid out in the table below. This
allows us to apply consistent analysis across a wide range of satisfaction research.
Average rating Level of satisfaction
Under 50
Very low/weak/poor
50-54 Low/weak/poor
55-64 Fairly/relatively/quite low/weak/poor
65-69 Fair/reasonable
70-79 Fairly/relatively/quite good
80-84 Good or fairly high
85-90 Very good or high
90+ Excellent or very high
Levels of satisfaction with public transport among disabled customers are
relatively good, with the lowest mean rating being 77 out of 100 for black
cabs/taxis. Dial-a-Ride is rated particularly highly by disabled customers, receiving
an overall satisfaction rating of 92 out of 100, as well as trams receiving a rating of
91 out of 100 [16].
In general, the average satisfaction ratings across various transport types are tje
same for disabled customers as non-disabled customers.
Satisfaction with buses and bus stations has gradually improved over recent years
[16].
Transport for London – Disabled People 239

Disabled People
Overall satisfaction with transport types (2014/15) [16]
Satisfaction score (0-100)
Bus services:
All transport
users
Disabled
transport
users
Non-disabled
transport
users
Base (14,155) (1,319) (12,574)
Satisfaction score 85 85 85
Bus stations:
Base (3,626) (164) (2,801)
Satisfaction score 78 84 79
Underground:
Base (17,634) (726) (16,813)
Satisfaction score 84 84 84
Dial-a-Ride:
Base n/a (2,572) n/a
Satisfaction score n/a 92 n/a
DLR:
Base (13,398) (258) (12,532)
Satisfaction score 89 89 89
Overground:
Base (5,397) (81) (4,981)
Satisfaction score 83 84 83
Trams:
Base (4,329) (361) (3,967)
Satisfaction score 89 91 89
Black cabs/taxi:
Base (569) (63) (501)
Satisfaction score 83 77 85
Private hire vehicle:
Base (439) (71) (355)
Satisfaction score 80 84 80
Woolwich Ferry:
Base (1,056) (63) (993)
Satisfaction score 79 82 79
Victoria Coach Station:
Base (1,204) (79) (1,125)
Satisfaction score 82 86 81
Satisfaction not shown for London River Services and Night buses due to small base sizes.
Transport for London – Disabled People 240

Score out of 100
Disabled People
Bus
Among disabled people who use the bus, satisfaction is fairly high at 85 out of 100;
this is the same level that we have recorded for non-disabled bus users [16].
Specific elements of bus services are also rated fairly highly by disabled bus users;
for example, satisfaction with safety and security on the bus (87 out of 100) and
the driver’s behaviour and attitude (87 out of 100) [16].
Over time, satisfaction with buses is generally consistent among disabled users
[16].
Overall satisfaction with buses over time [16]
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
78 78
81 83 82 81 81 82 81 82 82 83 85
76 77 78 78 78 80 80 79 80 80 82 83 85
Disabled
Transport for London – Disabled People 241

Score out of 100
Disabled People
As with other types of transport, satisfaction with value for money is lower among
both disabled and non-disabled customers than satisfaction with other aspects of
bus travel (74 out of 100 for disabled Londoners compared with 72 out of 100 for
non-disabled Londoners), compared with over 80 out of 100 for many other
aspects. [16].
Satisfaction with value for money with buses over time [16]
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
80 81
78 78
75 73
76 76 76 75
71 69 70
72 72 71
74 74 73
69 66 68
Disabled Non-disabled
71
74
71 72
Drivers of satisfaction
From our key driver analysis we have found that the drivers of satisfaction with
buses among disabled customers are somewhat different to those for nondisabled
customers, with the level of crowding playing a more important role
among disabled bus users than non-disabled customers [16].
Satisfaction among bus users is driven by:
Drivers of satisfaction for bus users [16]
Disabled customers
Ease of making journey
Non-disabled customers
Journey time
Level of crowding on bus
Journey time
Time waited to catch bus
Availability of seats on bus
Ease of making journey
Comfort inside the bus
Time waited to catch bus
Satisfaction with info on delays at stop
Transport for London – Disabled People 242

Score out of 100
Disabled People
Tube
Among disabled Tube users, satisfaction is fairly high at 84 out of 100. This is the
same level as for non-disabled Londoners [16].
Customer satisfaction research shows that satisfaction with various parts of the
Tube experience among disabled Tube users is fairly high. For example, personal
safety in the station (84 out of 100) and on the train (85 out of 100) [16].
Overall satisfaction with the Tube over time [16]
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
80 81
78 80
84 83 84
83 83 84
Disabled
Satisfaction with value for money is higher among disabled users than nondisabled
users (77 out of 100 compared with 68 out of 100) [16].
Drivers of satisfaction
Satisfaction with the Tube is driven by a number of factors that are focused
primarily upon ease, comfort and journey length. There are very few differences in
the top three drivers of satisfaction between disabled and non-disabled Tube users
[16]:
Drivers of satisfaction for Tube users [16]
Disabled customers
Ease of making journey
Non-disabled customers
Ease of making journey
Comfort of journey
Length of journey time
Smoothness of journey
Train crowding
Length of journey time
Comfort of journey
Length of time waited for train
Personal safety on train
Transport for London – Disabled People 243

Disabled People
Tube accessibility mystery travellers
We carry out mystery traveller accessibility assessments on the Tube. Our
research from Q3 2014/15 found that almost all (96 per cent) of assessments
resulted in no issues with anything blocking the mystery travellers’ way or
impeding them at the entrance or the exit of a Tube station. Small proportions
reported an escalator not working (six per cent). No lifts were found to be out-ofuse
during the quarter’s assessments [83].
This research also measures the availablity and support of staff at stations. Thirtyfour
per cent of physically or visually impaired assessors were approached and
offered assistance in the ticket hall area by a member of staff and 87 per cent of
the assessments found staff politeness to be excellent or good and 82 per cent,
helpful at the same standard [83].
Transport for London – Disabled People 244

Disabled People
Overground
Overall satisfaction among disabled Overground customers is fairly high at 84 out of 100
and is higher than that of non-disabled users (83 out of 100) [16].
Overall satisfaction with London Overground over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score
(0-100)
All Disabled Nondisabled
Base 2014/15 (5,397) (81) (4,981)
2009/10 73 75 73
2010/11 80 84 80
2011/12 82 85 81
2012/13 82 85 82
2013/14 82 87 82
2014/15 83 84 83
Satisfaction with value for money, although not being a top five influencing factor
on overall satisfaction, is also fairly high among disabled users (75 out of 100
compared with 73 out of 100 for non-disabled users) [16].
Satisfaction with value for money with London Overground over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score
(0-100)
All Disabled Nondisabled
Base 2014/15 (5,182) (82) (4,926)
2011/12 72 83 71
2012/13 71 80 71
2013/14 70 81 70
2014/15 73 75 73
Drivers of satisfaction
For disabled users of the Overground, satisfaction is mainly driven by feeling
valued, value for money and ease of making a journey. Most of these elements are
also main drivers for non-disabled Londoners [16].
Drivers of satisfaction for Overground users [16]
Disabled customers
Feel valued as a customer
Non-disabled customers
Ease of making your journey
Train journey in terms of value for money
Ease of making journey
Comfort of this train
Condition and state of repair of the train
Condition and state of repair of the train
Feel valued as a customer
Comfort of this train
Information about service disruptions on
the train
Transport for London – Disabled People 245

Disabled People
Docklands Light Railway (DLR)
Disabled DLR users are very satisfied with the service overall, giving a mean score
of 89 out of 100, which is the same as the satisfaction level seen for non-disabled
users (89 out of 100) [16].
Overall satisfaction with DLR over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score
(0-100)
All Disabled Nondisabled
Base 2014/15 (13,398) (258) (12,532)
2009/10 81 83 81
2010/11 81 85 81
2011/12 82 84 83
2012/13 87 87 87
2013/14 87 90 87
2014/15 89 89 89
Satisfaction with value for money is higher among disabled users than nondisabled
users (81 and 77 out of 100 respectively). However, it is generally lower
than overall satisfaction, as with all types of transport [16].
Satisfaction with value for money with DLR over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score
(0-100)
All Disabled Nondisabled
Base 2014/15 (12,839) (254) (12,327)
2011/12 72 78 72
2012/13 74 82 74
2013/14 75 85 75
2014/15 77 81 77
Drivers of satisfaction
Satisfaction among disabled users of the DLR is driven by a number of factors such
as feeling valued as a customer, journey length and ease of making a journey.
Comfort inside the train is a bigger factor for non-disabled customers [16].
Drivers of satisfaction for DLR users [16]
Disabled
Feel valued as a customer
Non-disabled
Ease of making your journey
Journey length
Ease of making your journey
Reliability of trains
Cleanliness and freedom from litter inside the train
Comfort inside the train
Reliability of trains
Journey length
Feel valued as a customer
Transport for London – Disabled People 246

Disabled People
Dial-a-Ride
Overall user satisfaction with Dial-a-Ride is very high at 92 out of 100.
Satisfaction levels among disabled users are considered excellent across various
aspects of the Dial-a-Ride service. The highest level of satisfaction is with the
helpfulness and courtesy of Dial-a-Ride drivers and cleanliness of interior (mean
rating of 94 out of 100) [16].
Satisfaction with Dial-a-Ride (2014/15) [16]
Mean rating (0-100)
All
Base 2,075-2,572
Satisfaction with…
Overall 92
Driver 94
Interior vehicle cleanliness 94
Exterior vehicle cleanliness 93
Ease of getting on and off the
91
bus
We organise regular local area meetings across London with users of the Dial-a-
Ride service to understand their needs better, receive feedback and make
improvements to the service. In late 2013/early 2014, we carried out research
among Dial-a-Ride customers who attended a feedback meeting to understand
how the service meets their needs and how useful the meetings are.
Overall, the meetings were found to be useful and scored highly across many key
measures, including overall satisfaction and usefulness. Ninety-five per cent of
attendees stated that they were satisfied overall with the meeting format and 89
per cent agreed that the meetings met their needs.
Most are satisfied with the service that Dial-a-Ride provides. However, there are
some suggested improvements in the booking process [89].
Transport for London – Disabled People 247

Disabled People
Trams
Overall satisfaction with trams is high among both disabled customers (91 out of
100) and non-disabled customers (89 out of 100) [16].
Overall satisfaction with trams over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score
(0-100)
All Disabled Nondisabled
Base 2014/15 (4,329) (361) (3,697)
2009/10 86 89 86
2010/11 85 88 85
2011/12 86 90 85
2012/13 89 92 89
2013/14 89 90 89
2014/15 89 91 89
Overall satisfaction with value for money on the tram network is quite good (78
out of 100). There are no differences in the satisfaction with value for money
scores given by disabled and non-disabled customers [16].
Satisfaction with value for money with trams over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score
(0-100)
All Disabled Nondisabled
Base 2014/15 (2,824) (84) (2,649)
2011/12 73 * 73
2012/13 77 79 77
2013/14 78 81 78
2014/15 78 78 78
* Denotes small base size (percentages not shown in this report for base sizes of less than 50).
Transport for London – Disabled People 248

Disabled People
Streets
Disabled Londoners are less satisfied with streets and pavements in London than
non-disabled Londoners. Disabled Londoners are significantly less likely to have
been satisfied on their last walking journey than non-disabled Londoners, with 51
per cent of disabled Londoners satisfied compared to 71 per cent of non-disabled
Londoners. Disabled Londoners are also slightly less satisfied with streets and
pavements on their last car journey than non-disabled Londoners (51 per cent and
61 per cent respectively) [34].
Sixty-five per cent of disabled Londoners consider the condition of pavements to
be a barrier to walking, and 43 per cent report that obstacles on pavements are a
barrier to walking more [65].
Overall satisfaction with streets and pavement after last journey over time – walking
journey [34]
Net fairly
satisfied/very
satisfied (%)
All Disabled Nondisabled
Base 2014/15 (957) (155) (786)
2011 64 51 65
2012 68 50 70
2013 69 59 70
2014 68 49 70
2015 68 51 71
Overall satisfaction with streets and pavements after last journey over time - car journey
[34]
Net fairly
satisfied/very
satisfied (%)
All Disabled Nondisabled
Base 2014/15 (830) (147) (669)
2011 54 56 55
2012 62 59 63
2013 57 51 58
2014 61 54 61
2015 60 51 61
Sixty-two per cent of disabled Londoners are satisfied with the ease of crossing
the road on foot (compared to 79 per cent of non-disabled Londoners) [85].
Please note that satisfaction for streets is calculated as a combination of ‘very
satisfied’ and ‘fairly satisfied’, and therefore it cannot be directly compared with
other customer satisfaction scores that we have presented in this document.
Transport for London – Disabled People 249

Disabled People
Transport for London Road Network (TRLN)
Satisfaction with the general impression of the TLRN is reasonable to fairly good. Disabled
customers give a score of 67 out of 100 for walking and driving, 70 out of 100 for travelling
by bus and 71 for cycling on the TLRN [16].
Overall satisfaction – general impression of red routes over time [16]
Satisfaction score (0-100) All Disabled Nondisabled
Walking
Base 2014-15 (1,254) (197) (1,037)
2013/14 70 70 70
2014/15 68 67 68
Travelling by bus
Base 2014-15 (4,620) (795) (3,744)
2013/14 69 70 69
2014/15 71 70 71
Driving
Base 2014-15 (3,605) (553) (3,005)
2013/14 67 70 67
2014/15 67 67 67
Cycling
Base 2014-15 (1,838) (239) (1,575)
2013/14 69 * 69
2014/15 70 71 70
* Denotes small base size (data not shown in this report for base sizes of less than 50).
Transport for London – Disabled People 250

Disabled People
Access to information
All customers using our transport network need information. Disabled customers
have many of the same information needs as non-disabled Londoners; however,
where customers have specific impairments these can have a substantial effect
upon their travel information needs, particularly around accessibility [86].
Following the success of our information provision during the 2012 Games, we
undertook a number of research programmes among different groups, including
disabled Londoners. The focus was upon how our work during the Olympics can
be developed further to best meet customers’ needs and maximise the legacy
from the Games in this area.
Some disabled people plan their journeys meticulously and seek reassurance that
at each step along their route they know what to do and where to go, researching
suitable, accurate and up-to-date accessibility information for each station and
stop that they plan to use. This takes time and can become a barrier for some,
especially when alternative travel options are available such as a car. Information
is therefore a key element of the service provided for many disabled customers.
[87].
Customer service centre
Providing excellent customer service is very important to TfL and it is currently
reviewing its processes to make it easier for all customers to use the network. For
example, contact centres have assigned accessibility champions and we ensuring
that bus drivers are receiving updated training which has been developed with the
input of disabled customers [22].
Our accessibility mystery traveller surveys are conducted by disabled assessors
who evaluate live information sources, use of the transport network and the
service that TfL provides. Assessors also evaluate telephone and email
information advice services. These services are used by many Londoners for
planning their journeys and gaining information. In qualitative research, disabled
Londoners often report that they rely heavily on customer service centres for
journey information [66].
Staff interaction scores (a mix of helpfulness, politeness and patience indicators)
are high among assessors (96 per cent) and 99 per cent of calls were answered
within five minutes [83, 88].
Information received is generally felt to be of good quality and helpful by assessors
who used the telephone service (85 per cent) [88].
Transport for London – Disabled People 251

Disabled People
Access to the internet
Most information provided by TfL, including accessibility-related information, is
available online, often in addition to various offline sources.
A significantly lower proportion of disabled Londoners access the internet
compared with non-disabled Londoners (76 per cent compared with 93 per cent).
This is due primarily to the older age profile of disabled Londoners. However, even
accounting for this there are significant differences:
Internet access among disabled people aged under 65 is 90 per cent compared
with 97 per cent for non-disabled Londoners of the same age
Fifty-three per cent of disabled Londoners aged 65 and over access the
internet compared with 67 per cent of non-disabled Londoners of the same
age
Disabled Londoners who access the internet use fewer online facilities than nondisabled
internet users – with the exception of ‘playing games’ which is on a par
for disabled and non-disabled Londoners (both 36%). All aspects of internet use
covered in the research are less commonly used by disabled internet users than
non-disabled users. As with internet access, this is likely to be related to the older
age profile of disabled people, as older people tend to access fewer online
facilities.
Access to the internet (Apr/ Oct 2014) [15]
%
All
Disabled
Disabled
16-64
Disabled
65+
Nondisabled
Nondisabled
16-64
Nondisabled
65+
Base (2,001) (268) (1,688) (115) (1,209) (153) (479)
Any access 92 76 93 90 97 53 67
Access at home 89 75 91 89 94 51 66
Access at work 56 14 60 22 67 2 7
Access ‘on the
move’
61 23 65 31 71 10 16
None 8 24 7 10 3 47 33
Device usage and behaviour
Disabled Londoners are significantly less likely than non-disabled Londoners to
have a smartphone (44 per cent compared with 80 per cent), a pattern which is
seen across age groups. Disabled mobile users are also considerably less likely to
access the internet on their mobile device (42 per cent compared with 81 per cent)
[15].
Transport for London – Disabled People 252

Disabled People
Proportion of Londoners who use a smartphone (iPhone, BlackBerry, other) (Apr/ Oct
2014) [15]
Disabled
16-64
Disabled
65+
% All Disabled Nondisabled
Nondisabled
16-64
Nondisabled
65+
Base (2,001) (268) (1,688) (115) (1,209) (153) (479)
Uses a
smartphone
77 44 80 61 87 15 28
Proportion of mobile phone owners who have ever accessed the internet on their mobile
device (Apr/ Oct 2014) [15]
Disabled
16-64
Disabled
65+
% All Disabled Nondisabled
Nondisabled
16-64
Nondisabled
65+
Base (1,802) (225) (1,539) (109) (1,150) (116) (389)
Ever accessed
the internet on
their mobile
device
78 42 81 55 87 13 32
Apps
Many of the specific information needs expressed by disabled customers may be
well suited to an app. Customers with cognititve impairments also suggest that
facilities such as drop-down menus and visual cues, which are often part of apps,
can help them to find the route that they need in an easier way than some
websites [66].
App usage has increased considerably in the last few years, particularly amongst
disabled Londoners [15].
Among both disabled and non-disabled Londoners who have a mobile device
capable of accessing apps, the majority have now downloaded at least one app -
either free or paid for. There is now little difference in app usage between
disabled and non-disabled smartphone users (87 per cent and 88 per cent
respectively), which is in stark contrast to 2012/2013 when far fewer disabled
Londoners had downloaded at least one app than non-disabled Londoners (39 per
cent compared with 72 per cent respectively) [15].
Transport for London – Disabled People 253

Disabled People
Preference towards using apps or websites (Apr/ Oct 2014) [15]
% Disabled Non-disabled
Base (all who
download apps)
Always prefer to use
apps
Sometimes prefer to
use apps, sometimes
prefer to use websites
Always prefer to use
websites
(61) (894)
51 46
22 34
26 20
Although small sample sizes don't allow robust comparison, it appears that among
those who use both websites and apps, disabled Londoners are more likely to have
a preference for one or the other than non-disabled Londoners [15].
Use of the TfL website
The TfL website contains a wealth of information that answers many of the needs
that disabled customers raised during our qualitative research. Disabled
customers who use the TfL site tend to agree that it is ‘best in class’ and that it
contains most of the information that they need. The key barrier that TfL faces to
ensure that we get our information to people who need it is that disabled
customers are not always using the site or are not currently using it in an
optimised way [66].
Among all disabled Londoners, 54 per cent make use of the TfL website. This
compares to 81 per cent of non-disabled Londoners [15].
Disabled Londoners are less likely to visit the TfL website at least three to four
times a week than non-disabled users (13 per cent compared with33 per cent) [15].
Proportion of Londoners who visit www.tfl.gov.uk (Apr/ Oct 2014) [15]
% All Disabled Non-disabled
Base (2,001) (268) (1,688)
Daily 9 3 11
Up to 3-4 times a week 21 10 22
Up to 3-4 times a month 20 12 21
About once a month 17 12 17
Less than once a month 11 18 11
Never 20 43 17
Don’t know/ refused 2 3 2
Transport for London – Disabled People 254

Disabled People
The most common reason for both disabled and non-disabled Londoners to visit
the TfL website is to use Journey Planner. However, compared to non-disabled
users, disabled users are slightly less likely to visit the TfL website to use Journey
Planner (63 per cent of disabled users claimed this to be their main reason for
visiting compared with 68 per cent of non-disabled users). Instead, they are
slightly more likely to visit for the purposes of finding out live travel information
(32 per cent compared with 30 per cent for non-disabled Londoners) and finding a
map (18 per cent compared with 15 per cent) [37].
Main purpose of today’s visit to the TfL website (2013) [37]
%
Nondisabled
All Disabled
Base (28,278) (2,180) (25,562)
Using Journey Planner to plan a route 68 63 68
Finding out live travel information 30 32 30
Finding out about planned works or
24 24 24
closures
Doing something related to Oyster cards or 20 19 20
other tickets
Finding a map 15 18 15
Doing something related to Congestion
4 5 4
Charge
Finding out about cycling 2 3 2
Finding out about roads or driving 2 3 2
Other 4 7 4
Social media
Use of social media by disabled people in London is growing with several feeds
gaining traction. Common Twitter feeds include:
@transportforall
@everydayableism
@TfLaccess
@Tubelifts
Social media offers many opportunities for disabled people to be informed and
share experiences [76]. Social media comments made about accessibility fall into
two main categories: general access concerns and lifts and ramps, indicating that
day-to-day problems concern commentators more than bigger issues [95].
Transport for London – Disabled People 255

Disabled People
A small-scale survey of @TfLaccess users asked what improvements would be
welcomed. Responses show how users like to engage with the feed and are
seeking greater content:
‘Tweets about out of service lifts are great and very important. Especially where
they are the only one to a line’
‘Images demonstrating what is being discussed’
‘Take simple complaints and follow up’
‘Timely info’
‘More tweets just discovered feed and looking forward to more content’
‘Pics’
‘At least you are human - and you get a response (unlike @TFLofficial). but you
could be even MORE human. Be more chatty’ [91]
Paper-based maps and timetables
Maps and timetables are widely used by disabled customers, referring to them
both at home and on the journey. The ‘disabled sign’ is used as a quick reference
to whether the station will be accessible [66]. There is evidence that disabled
customers have a higher reliance on paper-based sources than non-disabled
customers. However, this may be due to the higher proportion of disabled
customers who are older than among non-disabled customers [48].
Many disabled customers consider paper maps and timetables to be easy to use,
read and understand and offer reassurance while on the journey, especially in the
case of a disruption. They also provide customers with time to digest the
information in a tangible way [66].
We discussed a number of paper-based information sources with disabled
Londoners. Reflecting other research and wider findings, disabled Londoners were
generally very positive about each of the resources shown to them. However,
awareness that the information was provided in this format was often very low.
Tube map with accessibility icons – found to be very useful and to provide
instant accessibility information at a glance. There was, however, some
confusion about exactly what the accessibility icons mean, particularly the icon
referring to step-free access from street to platform; some customers were
unsure whether they could actually board the train at these stations
Toilet guide – felt to be very useful as several customers pre-plan journeys
around toilet availability
Getting Around London, A4-sized accessibility guide – liked as a reference
document for the home; some did feel this provided too much information to
digest when travelling
Enlarged Tube map – felt to be clear to read and understand
Transport for London – Disabled People 256

Disabled People
Audio Tube map – hearing-impaired customers included in the research said
this was a great way to obtain this information
Tube map in black and white – although recognised as a useful resource, there
were some specific improvements suggested around the labelling of lines [66]
We also carried out research to investigate the viability for the addition of
accessibility icons and the ATOC London rail and Tube Services map. Disabled
people, both wheelchair users and Londoners with other mobility impairments,
generally think that the inclusion of accessibility information on this map would be
a good development. However, our research also identified the need for any
additional information to be clear and concise, as maps can already be confusing
to some Londoners due to the volume of information portrayed. Accessibility
symbols therefore need to be consistent and intuitive [86].
Tube information products
Many disabled Londoners are impressed with the suite of materials that TfL has
produced to help customers plan and complete their journeys, once they become
aware of the range of information available. Our information products encourage
a sense of inclusion and help to reassure people about their Tube travel. However,
awareness of these information products was low, and beyond an explicit
assumption that ‘some accessibility information’ would exist, very few people
knew of their availability [13].
In 2014 we ran a communication campaign to increase awareness of the range of
accessibility information that we provide.
As well as targeting user information, the campaign also sparked discussion on
social media around the Turn-up-and-go service that we have introduced on the
Tube [76].
Transport for London – Disabled People 257

Disabled People
Step-free Tube guide
The standard Tube map contains information on whether a station has step-free
access from street to train, or street to platform. This is generally well received
and commonly referred to by disabled Londoners [66].
A key piece of information that we have provided to help people - particularly
wheelchair users - to navigate the Underground network is the Step-free Tube
guide. This guide provides much more detail on the accessibility of specific
stations. Disabled customers whom we asked about the guide felt it to be useful,
once they understand it [66]. Among disabled Londoners who use the Tube and
who were shown an image of the step-free Tube map, 55 per cent were aware of
the guide and 36 per cent said that they had used it [48].
The Step-free Tube guide provides a large amount of information about the
detailed accessibility parameters of Underground stations. Once people had
studied the guide, they said that they felt it was highly useful and the information
empowering. The guide actually encouraged some disabled customers to consider
using the network more and with greater confidence and reassurance. However,
initially the guide can be seen as overwhelming due to the amount of information
it contains [66].
Signage
We have developed a new signage strategy based on the principles that we used
during the 2012 Games [22].
We have carried out research among passengers with reduced mobility (which
includes disabled people as well as people encumbered by luggage or using
pushchairs). The results identified that customers found it difficult to understand
complex signs that are constructed entirely of symbols, and that text is needed to
clarify the meaning in some cases. Designers need to include sufficient
information to make a sign useful, without providing so much information that it
becomes confusing.
For example, the sign on the left below was clearly understood to indicate the
direction of the lifts, but did not communicate to customers which parts of the
station could be accessed by using the lifts. On the other hand, the sign on the
right was confusing to many due to its complexity, and in some cases it raised
more questions; for example, many concluded (incorrectly) that the Victoria line
was not accessible by using the lifts.
Transport for London – Disabled People 258

Disabled People
Symbols can become attached to particular meanings which render them
ineffective at communicating different messages. For example, the wheelchair
symbol was interpreted to mean that step-free facilities were for the use of
wheelchair users, rather than anyone who could benefit from them [90].
It is clearest to customers where lifts will take them if directional arrows are
accompanied by text. Without written information, many customers can be
uncertain which parts of the station can be accessed by using the lifts. Here is an
example of the most successful signage option that we covered in the research
[92]:
During accompanied journeys made with disabled customers, some made the
suggestion that signage should indicate the distance between points within the
station [92].
Legible London
Feedback from disabled Londoners in our development of the Legible London
wayfinding system showed that the style of maps was well received and that in
general, the wayfinding system was popular. There was some acknowledgement
that maps and signs cannot meet the needs of all disabled people with, for
example, the maps needing to be a different height for wheelchair users as
opposed to Londoners with visual impairments [93].
iBus display
The iBus information system on buses is welcomed by bus users, not just disabled
Londoners.
One area for potential improvement would be for one iBus display to face the
front of the bus on the lower level as the current location is not visible by
wheelchair users [66]. This is the case on the New Bus for London (NBFL) and is
noted as a positive by the wheelchair user mystery travellers [94].
Our AMTS bus survey showed us that the audio announcements on the bus are
clear to the majority of assessors (95 per cent) [83].
‘The iBus was clear and I heard my stop announced in good time.’
(Visually impaired assessor) [83]
‘The big improvement for me was having an iBus display positioned at the rear of
the bus for rear-facing passengers.’
(Wheelchair user using NBfL) [94]
Transport for London – Disabled People 259

Disabled People
Customer satisfaction data provides a score of 84 out of 100 for interior bus
information among disabled customers, compared with 85 out of 100 given by
non-disabled customers [16].
For passengers with partial or full hearing loss, bus travel is often the preferred
way to travel as it provides access to the driver and the iBus display [73]. Hearingimpaired
customers also report making full use of the ability to see where they are
through the windows and this is cited as another reason to prefer the bus over
other types of transport [66].
Pedestrian Countdown
Pedestrian Countdown has been introduced at pedestrian crossings to show the
time counting down after the ‘green for pedestrians’ phase ends and before the
‘green for vehicles’ phase begins. Shortly after the introduction of pedestrian
crossing countdowns, 50 per cent of disabled Londoners reported seeing it around
the Capital and 40 per cent of disabled Londoners had used it; almost everyone
who had used the system found it useful [48].
New technology is now being tested which will further aid Londoners when using
pedestrian crossings. The technology will adjust the light phasing when a lot of
people are waiting to cross, thus allowing greater time for pedestrians to cross at
busy times.
Disruptions
Information is particularly important to customers in the event of a disruption.
While many disabled Londoners are confident travellers, many also recognise that
the impact of disruptions can be greater for them, and they have a concern that
they could easily get stuck [87].
Disabled customers have concerns about disruptions. These concerns are also
experienced by non-disabled customers; however, disruptions can be more
impactful for disabled customers because they can face greater difficulties
overcoming their effects. Disabled customers report that they can experience
anxiety during disruptions and that access to reliable, live information is key to
minimising this [66].
Disabled customers want to know:
How long the disruption will last
- Some disabled customers say they would prefer to stay with their original plan if
the disruption is not likely to last too long, so this information can help them
decide whether it is absolutely necessary to change their travel plan
- This information is also needed to control anxiety for some customers and
maintain a sense of control during the journey
Transport for London – Disabled People 260

Disabled People
How they can reach their destination if their original route is disrupted
- Customers seek information to tell them what to do next, and they look to TfL
to inform them of a new route or to signpost them towards where they can find
information about this
- Disabled customers do not want to be the last to know – this is especially true
for hearing-impaired customers who can feel excluded by audio announcements
Whether the new route will be accessible
- This is particularly important for customers who experience barriers due to a
mobility or visual impairment
- Distances to and location of alternative transport types – how far they will need
to walk and where to
- Customers also seek information about the station that they have arrived into
unexpectedly
The presence of staff during disruptions provides much reassurance for disabled
customers as they expect them to be experts in advising on new accessible routes
and providing live up-to-date information.
Some disabled customers also suggest that apps and interactive information points at
stations or stops would be useful to communicate disruption-related information as this can
be accessed during the journey [66].
Transport for London – Disabled People 261

Disabled People
Accessibility information case study
The public transport information needs of disabled Londoners are served through a variety
of online and offline resources. TfL has a wealth of information and data available which we
can present to disabled customers to assist their journey planning and ongoing system
experience.
Our current information sources, such as the Step-free Tube guide, provide customers with
a lot of data, and we have been developed them over time to meet the infrastructure
changes made to the system and evolving needs of customers.
Following the 2012 Games, during which TfL was highly commended for our information
provision to customers, particularly disabled customers, we commissioned a large-scale
qualitative research programme to understand:
What disabled customers want to know when making a familiar or unfamiliar journey
How disabled customers would like to receive this information
Where disabled customers expect to find this information
Factors found to impact on our customers’ need for information included:
An individual’s attitude towards planning a journey can sometimes play a more
important role than the barrier that a customer is living with. Disabled people who
experience greater accessibility barriers but have a ‘planner’ attitude may find getting
around London using TfL easier than a ‘non-planner’ who experiences fewer barriers
The longer a customer has been disabled the more likely they are to have developed
their knowledge and strategies for using TfL most effectively, and they tend therefore
to seek less information from TfL
Age can also play a role in the level of information required. Sometimes older
customers can become less confident about using TfL services and can require
information as a result. A similar pattern exists with non-disabled older Londoners
It is important to note that not all disabled customers feel that they have specific
information needs above and beyond other customers due to the barriers they face
Transport for London – Disabled People 262

Disabled People
Disabled customers can benefit from a wide range of information in order to make full use
of the transport network across London. Much of their information requirements match
those of non-disabled customers, and reflect other research that we have taken and
commissioned from other organisations into the provision of pre-, during and post-journey
information.
Disabled customers’ information requirements fit around their journey needs into four
interlocking categories:
Access – disabled customers can benefit from detailed and up-to-date information on
all access points
Reassurance – a critical element of the information mix for disabled customers.
Knowledge that the journey will run as smoothly as possible. Access, navigation and
comfort also play a key role in reassurance
‘A lot of the time customers just want us to reassure them. Most know their routes and
journey, but they may want us to check things, like if lifts are working for example.’
(London Underground Customer Care Assistant)
Navigation – information to help customers find their way, particularly between types
of transport and within types, as well as finding their way between stations/stops
Comfort – disabled customers benefit from knowing where there is access to toilets,
the likely level of crowding when travelling and the likely ability to get a seat. These
factors have an impact on comfort
Transport for London – Disabled People 263

Disabled People
Four key findings were identified from the research:
Currently TfL provides comprehensive information for disabled customers, however,
many are not fully aware of the range of sources that we provide
We have developed our website to include greater signposting towards accessible
information resources. We have also started a work stream to maximise
communications through partner organisations and third parties
‘I just didn’t know all this information was out there. I am so pleased TfL does things
like toilet and step-free guides, but TfL needs to get it out there.’ (Mobility-impaired
customer)
Although material is comprehensive, there are a number of specific perceived
information gaps. We have reviewed the perceived gaps identified by our research and
made a number of changes and additions to our suite of accessibility information as a
result, for example new improved accessibility pages on the TfL website
The way that information is delivered is very important and multiple methods are
needed to reach a wide audience
Our staff are heavily relied upon by disabled customers, and so helping staff to better
assist and provide information to disabled customers through improved access to
information is crucial
Ongoing research
Priority seating on transport:
Customers and stakeholders have sent feedback to TfL about using priority seating on
transport, and in response we are trying to better understand the journeys made by people
who are pregnant, have a disability- especially an unseen one - or who are older and who
are less able to stand.
Our objectives for this research are to understand any barriers that may prevent these
groups of people from using the transport network, the importance of getting a seat on
transport and today’s use of priority seating areas. We will explore possible solutions to
help customers with a disability travel more comfortably, such as changes in messaging,
signage and use of badges. We will also try to uncover any potential problems with each
solution that may emerge in the customer environment.
We are conducting sixteen accompanied interviews with people who require a seat when
travelling, covering visible and hidden conditions, and temporary and permanent
conditions. In addition we have carried out research from a staff perspective, covering bus
and Tube transport employees. We are also completing a quantitative piece of research
that will help to quantify and contextualise these qualitative findings.
We are aiming for the results of this research to be made available by the end of the 2015.
Experience of London Minicabs among Assistance Dog Users
Transport for London – Disabled People 264

Disabled People
TfL is responsible for licensing London’s private hire operators, drivers and vehicles.
Although relatively few in number, we have received complaints to suggest that on
occasion, passengers with assistance dogs have experienced a less than adequate PHV
service.
Problems reported by customers travelling with assistance dogs include being charged
more to take the assistance dog in the vehicle or being refused by drivers because they do
not want to carry the assistance dog – both of which are offences. Anecdotal evidence also
suggests that there is significant under-reporting of incidents by passengers with guide
dogs.
Based on this intelligence, we commissioned research amongst assistance dog users to
understand the typical customer journey (pre-journey and the journey itself), the issues
that people face and also their preferences for future service provision. In addition, we set
out to measure the level of satisfaction with the current quality of service delivery and to
identify any areas of improvement to inform training and communication from TfL to the
drivers/operators.
Our research covered the views of 37 assistance dog users who have used or tried to use a
minicab in the last 12 months with an assistance dog.
Amongst this group, 78 per cent would prefer to travel in a black cab than a minicab (a
further 3 per cent do not have a preference between these two types of transport)
Assistant dog users gave a combined satisfaction score for their most recent minicab
journey as 73 out of 100; this compares to the average score amongst all minicab users
in the customer satisfaction survey of 80 out of 100 [16]
Half (51 per cent) of minicab users travelling with an assistance dog felt that the drivers’
reaction was positive, and amongst these customers satisfaction was high – receiving a
score of 93 out of 100. Conversely 17 per cent felt the drivers’ reaction to be negative
and amongst customers experiencing negative reactions, satisfaction was 42 out of 100
Eighty-one per cent of customers included in the research reported that a minicab
driver had refused to take them or attempted to refuse them for a journey in the past
and 51 per cent were refused or attempted to be refused by booking staff
Eight of the 37 respondents stated that on their most recent (attempted) minicab
journey they had been refused or attempted to be refused
The main reasons given for why the customer could not travel was that the minicab did
not have to take dogs, having a dog in the minicab may impact on future customers,
and having a dog in the minicab is too dirty. None of these reasons is valid under the
law
Just under half (16 out of 37) assistance dog users recalled staff charging or attempting
to charge extra for the journey and in 14 of these instances the respondent believed
this was due to their assistance dog
‘Put extra fee on as charge for luggage. So you(r) dog is luggage!’
‘For the dog as is an extra person’
Transport for London – Disabled People 265

Disabled People
Ninety-two per cent of assistance dog users have experienced an issue when making a
minicab booking or journey. The majority of these (82 per cent) made a complaint.
However, six users reported that they had not complained: three did not know where
to make a complaint, two did not have time to make a complaint and one was
concerned over the confidentiality of making a complaint [75]
Following the customer feedback received and the findings from this research, we are
developing a campaign to inform the industry (operators and drivers) of their obligations to
assistance dog users and that they could have legal action taken against them if they don’t
accept assistance dogs. We are also considering developing communications to assistance
dog users to inform them of how TfL can help (for example, with a complaint process).
Working together
The Valuing People group was first established in February 2007, linking TfL with the
Government’s Valuing People Now programme for people with learning disabilities in the
London region, and has been funded by TfL since April 2011.
The group has a high level of membership from people with a wide range of learning
disabilities and meets regularly with representation from 18-20 of London’s boroughs.
The network meets three times a year, with additional events and projects where members
and supporters of self-advocacy groups for people with learning disabilities can talk directly
with our managers about the transport services that they use as independent travellers,
and the types of support they need. It is also an opportunity for us to have ongoing
conversations with advocates from boroughs on a variety of issues raised by members and
TfL.
To date the group has been involved in discussions on a number of issues, including:
Travelling on the buses and the Tube, and the training that staff who work for the bus
operating companies and London Underground receive
Barriers to travel and transport for people, including a range of information issues
How to feel safe when travelling on the network; working with Safer Transport Teams
Design and use of travel support cards for people who may need extra help when
travelling on the network
Discussions on how well the Taxicard scheme and Dial-a-Ride services are working for
people with learning disabilities
Travel mentoring scheme
Consultation on TfL’s Single Equality Scheme
Introduction of cashless buses
London Underground’s Fit for the Future programme
Transport for London – Disabled People 266

People on low income
Summary: People on lower income
Key findings
Thirty-six per cent of Londoners live in lower income households (household income of
less than £20,000 per year) [12]
Women, disabled people, BAME Londoners and older people are more likely to live in
low income households than other Londoners [12]
Low income Londoners tend to travel less frequently than Londoners overall – 2.5 trips
per weekday compared to 2.7 among all Londoners [12]
The most common type of transport used by Londoners on lower incomes is walking
(94 per cent walk at least once a week) in line with all Londoners (96 per cent) [12]
The bus is the next most common type of transport used by Londoners on lower
incomes (70 per cent of Londoners with household income of less than £20,000 use the
bus at least once a week) [12]
Londoners living in lower income households are more likely than all Londoners to
have an older person’s Freedom Pass (24 per cent compared with 15 per cent) [12]
Londoners with a lower household income are less likely to hold an Oyster card than all
Londoners (48 per cent compared with 60 per cent) [12]
Londoners living in DE households (social grade D refers to semi- and un-skilled manual
workers and E refers to state pensioners, casual/lowest grade workers and unemployed
Londoners) are less likely to use the internet than all Londoners (79 per cent compared
with 92 per cent), and they are also less likely to use a smartphone (58 per cent
compared with 77 per cent); both factors are related to the older age profile of DE
Londoners [15]
Profile of Londoners in low income households
The definition of ‘low income’ is imprecise since it is a relative concept in which
household wealth depends on a number of factors, including household size and
non-income related wealth. Thirty-six per cent of Londoners can be classified as
having a lower annual household income (below £20,000 10 ) [12]. In some cases,
data for specific income groups is not available and socio-economic groups DE are
used as a proxy. Those classified as DE live in households where the chief income
earner is either in semi-skilled/ unskilled manual work, or is unemployed.
Londoners living in lower income households are more likely to be:
Women (56 per cent Londoners living in a household with an annual income
less than £20,000 compared with 51 per cent all Londoners)
BAME people (45 per cent Londoners living in a household with an annual
income less than £20,000 compared with 37 per cent all Londoners)
10 The cut-off point of £20,000 is used here since data are typically collected using this income bracket.
Transport for London – People on low incomes 267

People on low income
Older people (23 per cent Londoners living in a household with an annual
income less than £20,000 are aged over 65, whereas people in this age group
make up 13 per cent of the total London population)
Disabled people (20 per cent Londoners living in a household with an annual
income less than £20,000 compared with 11 per cent all Londoners) [12]
Transport behaviour
Londoners with lower household incomes (below £20,000) tend to make fewer
weekday trips than Londoners overall (2.5 compared with 2.7) [12].
The most commonly used type of transport by Londoners with a lower household
income is walking (94 per cent do so at least once a week) [12].
The bus is the next most commonly used form of transport for people living in
lower income households. Compared to 61 per cent of all Londoners using the bus
at least once a week, 70 per cent of people with household incomes less than
£20,000 do so (and this rises to 75 per cent among the lowest household income
bracket of less than £5,000) [12].
Londoners with lower household incomes are less likely to use a car (both as a
driver and passenger), train and Tube than all Londoners. This is most
pronounced with driving a car (26 per cent compared with 39 per cent overall)
and using the Tube at least once a week (31 per cent compared with 39 per
cent overall) [12]
The proportion of Londoners with access to at least one car falls with
decreasing household income, so that 73 per cent of Londoners in the lowest
household income bracket (less than £5,000) do not have access to a car
compared to 35 per cent of all Londoners [12]
Londoners with lower household incomes are less likely to hold an Oyster card
than all Londoners (48 per cent compared with 60 per cent) [12]
Londoners in DE households are less likely to cycle. Thirteen per cent of
Londoners living in a DE household sometimes use a bike to get around
London compared with 17 per cent of all Londoners [17]
Awareness of Cycle Hire (84 per cent) and Cycle Superhighways (39 per cent) is
lower among DE households compared to all Londoners (91 per cent and 41
per cent respectively) aware of the schemes [17]
Barriers
An overcrowded service is the most commonly mentioned barrier to travelling in
London [14].
Higher proportions of people in DE households than all Londoners say that
they are put off using public transport more often by concerns about antisocial
behaviour, fear of crime getting to or while travelling on buses and trains, and
concerns about knife crime [14]
Transport for London – People on low incomes 268

People on low income
Although the third most commonly mentioned barrier, cost of tickets is less
frequently stated among Londoners living in a DE household than all
Londoners (39 per cent of DE Londoners compared with 45 per cent of all
Londoners) [14]. This may be related to the increased use of Freedom Passes
and other travel passes among DE Londoners [12]
Customer satisfaction
Overall satisfaction with transport in London among DE Londoners is broadly
consistent with satisfaction levels of all Londoners [16].
Overall satisfaction with the bus is high (85 out of 100) and has increased over
time. Satisfaction with value for money of the bus is comparable between
Londoners living in a household with income of £20,000 or less and all
Londoners (71 out of 100 Londoners living in a household with income of
£20,000 or less compared with 72 out of 100 for all Londoners) [16]
Overall satisfaction with the Tube is fairly high among Londoners living in
lower income households (85 out of 100) in line with the score provided by all
Londoners (84 out of 100). Satisfaction with value for money of the Tube is
slightly higher among Londoners living in a lower income household (71 out of
100 compared with 69 out of 100 for all Londoners), most likely related to the
increased ownership of Freedom Passes [16]
Transport for London – People on low incomes 269

People on low income
Access to information
Seventy-nine per cent of Londoners living in a DE household access the internet,
considerably lower than the proportion of all Londoners (92 per cent). Similarly, a
lower proportion of Londoners living in a DE household access the TfL website (56
per cent of DE Londoners compared with 78 per cent of all Londoners).
Smartphone use is also lower among Londoners living in a DE household (58 per
cent of DE Londoners compared with 77 per cent of all Londoners) [15].
Transport for London – People on low incomes 270

People on low income
Introduction
Household wealth depends upon a number of factors, not just household income.
Among other things, household size, level of savings, benefits (often not
considered as income within market research surveys) and lifestyle all play a part
in how affluent a person might be.
We recognise the needs of Londoners with low incomes within the Single Equality
Scheme. This group includes a diverse mix of Londoners who are more likely to be
older, retired, women, people who are out of work and disabled Londoners. It is
recognised that people in this group are more likely to have travel needs
associated with affordability and accessibility of information [22].
Consequently, the main categories in this chapter are all Londoners and
Londoners with an annual household income of less than £20,000 11 . Additionally,
we refer to the following sub-categories of household income to provide further
understanding of how low income can affect travel attitudes and behaviours:
Less than £5,000
£5,000–£9,999
£10,000–£14,999
£15,000–£19,999
£20,000–£24,999
More than £25,000
Where data is not available for household incomes, the classification of DE social
grade is used as a proxy for low income. Social grades are determined through a
series of questions on the occupation of the chief income earner in the household.
Social grade D refers to semi- and un-skilled manual workers and E refers to state
pensioners, casual/lowest grade workers and unemployed Londoners [96].
11 The cut-off point of £20,000 is used here since data are typically collected using this income bracket.
Transport for London – People on low incomes 271

People on low income
Profile of low income people in London
An annual income of less than £20,000 is the definition used within this report for
‘low income’. Thirty-six per cent of Londoners live in a household with this income
level.
Profile of annual household income for all Londoners (2013/14) [12]
% All Londoners
Base (15,700)
Less than £5,000 7
£5,000–£9,999 11
£10,000–£14,999 10
£15,000–£19,999 8
£20,000–£24,999 8
£25,000+ 56
Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Where percentages do not sum to 100, this is due to rounding.
Transport for London – People on low incomes 272

People on low income
LTDS demographic profile of people on low incomes in London (2013/14) [12]
% All Less
than
£20k
Less
than £5k
£5k–
£9,999
£10k–
£14,999
£15k–
£19,999
£20k–
£24,999
(15,700) (5,510) (986) (1,628) (1,580) (1,316) (1,210)
Gender
Men 49 44 44 41 45 48 49
Women 51 56 56 59 55 52 51
Age
5-10 8 9 9 10 10 9 8
11-15 6 7 6 7 7 7 7
16-24 14 15 18 14 15 16 15
25-59 55 41 41 38 41 47 52
60-64 5 4 4 5 5 4 6
65-70 5 8 6 8 8 8 6
71-80 5 9 9 10 9 8 4
81+ 3 6 7 8 5 3 2
Ethnicity
White 62 55 55 56 56 55 55
BAME 37 45 45 44 44 45 45
Working status*
Working full-time 47 17 3 11 21 33 46
Working part-time 11 13 9 13 14 13 13
Student 10 14 20 13 12 12 10
Retired 15 28 28 33 28 23 14
Not working 16 27 39 29 24 19 15
Disabled
Yes 11 20 26 24 20 11 10
No 89 80 74 76 80 89 90
Impairment affects travel
Yes 10 18 24 22 18 9 9
No 90 82 76 78 82 91 91
*Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five and working status does not include under 16s.
All TfL surveys use the Equality Act 2010 to define disabled people as those who define themselves as having a long-term physical or mental
disability or health issue that impacts on their daily activities, the work they can do, or limits their ability to travel
Transport for London – People on low incomes 273

People on low income
Londoners living in a low income household are more likely to be women than
men. Among Londoners with household income under £20,000, 56 per cent are
women, compared to 51 per cent of all Londoners who are women. However,
under 25 year olds living in a low income household are evenly split between men
and women (49 per cent women compared with 51 per cent men) [2].
Proportion of women among those living in lower income households – less than £20,000
pa (2013/14) [12]
% women Low income Londoners
All 56
Under 25 49
25-64 58
65+ 59
Base: Londoners with household income less than £20k pa: all (5,510), under 25 year olds (1,567), 25-64 year olds (2,356), 65
year olds and over (1,587)
Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Employment
Transport can be a significant barrier to accessing employment. Two out of five
jobseekers say that a lack of transport acts as a barrier to getting work, and one in
four say that the cost of transport presents a problem with getting to interviews
[40].
As household incomes increase, the proportion of Londoners in work also rises
[12].
Among Londoners living in households with the lowest annual income levels,
under £10,000 a year, 26 per cent are retired [12].
London boroughs
The boroughs with the highest proportion of residents with a low household
income are:
Boroughs with the highest proportion of residents with low household incomes (2013/14)
[12]
Borough
% of low income households
Brent 59
Harrow 57
Tower Hamlets 55
Islington 44
Barking & Dagenham 43
Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Transport for London – People on low incomes 274

People on low income
The boroughs with the lowest proportion of residents living in households with an
annual income of £20,000 or less are:
Boroughs with the lowest proportion of residents with low household incomes (2013/14)
[12]
Borough
% of low income
households
Kingston upon Thames 23
Richmond upon Thames 23
Merton 25
Wandsworth 25
Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Transport for London – People on low incomes 275

People on low income
Travel behaviour
The average number of trips made per weekday rises with increasing household
income. For Londoners with an annual household income of less than £20,000, the
average number of trips per weekday is 2.5, and for Londoners with household
income of below £5,000, the average number of trips made per weekday is 2.3,
compared to 2.7 for all Londoners [12].
Average number of weekday trips made (2013/14) [12]
Income group
Average number of
weekday trips
All 2.7
Less than £20,000 2.5
Less than £5,000 2.3
£5,000–£9,999 2.6
£10,000–£14,999 2.6
£15,000–£19,999 2.5
£20,000–£24,999 2.8
£25,000 + 2.8
Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
According to our Customer Touchpoints customer segmentation typology, people
with lower household incomes often fall into the categories of ‘travel shy’ or
‘reassurance seeker’. Both groups tend to lack confidence in using the public
transport network. For Londoners classified as ‘travel shy’, familiar routes and
transport options appeal more than making unfamiliar journeys. ‘Reassurance
seekers’ will conduct their journeys seeking advice en route from staff and
members of the public [47].
Transport types used
Walking is the most commonly used type of transport by Londoners with low
incomes. Ninety-four per cent of Londoners with an annual household income of
£20,000 or less walk at least once a week in line with 96 per cent of all Londoners
[12].
Buses are the next most commonly used type of transport among Londoners with
a lower annual household income. Among Londoners with household incomes
under £5,000, 75 per cent use the bus at least once a week. This figure decreases
progressively with increasing household income bands so that 64 per cent of
Londoners living in households with an income of £20-24,999 use the bus at least
once a week – more in line with the proportion of all Londoners using the bus
weekly (61 per cent) [12].
Transport for London – People on low incomes 276

People on low income
For all other key types of transport (those used by at least 10 per cent of
Londoners), a smaller proportion of Londoners with a lower household income use
each type of transport at least once a week than all Londoners. Most notably, this
includes driving (26 per cent of Londoners with household income less than
£20,000 do this at least once a week compared to 39 per cent of all Londoners),
travelling as a car passenger (44 per cent lower income Londoners compared with
48 per cent all Londoners), National Rail (11 per cent of lower income Londoners
compared with 17 per cent of all Londoners) and travelling by Tube (31 per cent of
Londoners with household income of less than £20,000 compared with 39 per cent
of all Londoners) [12].
Similar levels of use are seen between all Londoners and Londoners living in low
income households for the Overground, minicabs, DLR, trams and motorbikes
[12].
Proportion of Londoners using all types of transport at least once a week (2013/14) [12]
% All All less
than
£20k
Less
than
£5k
£5k–
£9,999
£10k–
£14,999
£15k–
£19,999
£20k–
£24,999
Base (15,700) (5,510) (986) (1,628) (1,580) (1,316) (1,210)
Walking 96 94 94 93 93 97 97
Bus 61 70 75 70 67 71 64
Car (as a passenger) 48 44 37 41 48 47 49
Car (as a driver) 39 26 16 23 29 35 36
Tube 39 31 34 27 29 36 38
National Rail 17 11 8 10 10 14 18
Overground 9 8 11 8 7 9 10
Other taxi/minicab (PHV) 6 6 8 6 5 6 6
London taxi/black cab 5 3 4 3 2 2 2
DLR 4 4 5 4 3 5 7
Tram (Croydon Tramlink) 2 2 2 2 2 3 2
Motorbike 1 1 - 1 1 1 1
Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Transport for London – People on low incomes 277

People on low income
Walking
Ninety-four per cent of Londoners with household income of less than £20,000 a
year walk at least once a week; a similar proportion to all Londoners (96 per cent).
Most Londoners walk almost every day; 80 per cent of Londoners living in a
household with an annual income of less than £20,000 walk at least five times a
week, in line with all Londoners (83 per cent) [12].
Frequency of walking (2013/14) [12]
% All All less
than
£20k
Less
than
£5k
£5k–
£9,999
£10k–
£14,999
£15k–
£19,999
£20k–
£24,999
Base (15,700) (5,510) (986) (1,628) (1,580) (1,316) (1,210)
5 or more days a week 83 80 81 78 80 84 85
3 or 4 days a week 6 7 7 8 7 7 6
2 days a week 4 4 3 4 4 4 4
1 day a week 3 3 3 3 2 3 2
At least once a fortnight 1 1 1 1 1 - -
At least once a month 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
At least once a year 1 1 1 1 2 - 1
Not used in last year 1 3 2 3 3 2 1
Never used - 1 1 1 - - -
Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
When we consider specific journey purposes for walking, some differences appear
between all Londoners and Londoners living in DE households (used as a proxy for
lower income). Londoners living in DE households are less likely than all
Londoners to make walking journeys of any kind at least once a week [19].
Walking at least once a week by purpose of journey (2015) [19]
% who walk at least once a week All DE
Base (1,000) (224)
Walk…
To complete small errands such as getting a
86 82
newspaper or posting a letter
As part of a longer journey 77 61
To visit friends and relatives 49 46
To visit pubs/restaurants/cinemas and other
53 35
social places
To get to work/school/college 52 26
To take a child to school 18 16
Transport for London – People on low incomes 278

People on low income
Bus
Seventy per cent of Londoners in a low income household use the bus at least
once a week (compared to 61 per cent of all Londoners) [12].
The frequency of bus travel increases with lower household incomes; 75 per cent
of Londoners with household income of less than £5,000 use buses at least once a
week, compared with 64 per cent of Londoners with household income between
£20,000 and £24,999 [12].
People living in households with a lower annual income are also more likely to use
the bus on a daily basis; 33 per cent of Londoners living in a household with an
annual income of less than £20,000 use the bus at least five times a day compared
with 28 per cent of all Londoners [12].
Frequency of travelling by bus (2013/14) [12]
% All All less
than
£20k
Less
than
£5k
£5k–
£9,999
£10k–
£14,999
£15k–
£19,999
£20k–
£24,999
Base (15,700) (5,510) (986) (1,628) (1,580) (1,316) (1,210)
5 or more days a week 28 33 34 33 32 35 31
3 or 4 days a week 12 15 17 16 15 12 13
2 days a week 11 13 13 13 12 13 11
1 day a week 10 9 10 9 8 10 9
At least once a fortnight 5 4 5 3 4 5 5
At least once a month 10 7 4 9 8 6 10
At least once a year 14 10 7 10 11 12 14
Not used in last year 7 7 6 7 8 6 6
Never used 2 1 2 1 1 1 2
Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Bus journey purpose
Londoners living in low income households and all Londoners are using buses
during the day for similar reasons. However, at night a greater proportion of
Londoners living in low income households use the bus for work-related journeys
and a lower proportion for leisure reasons when compared to all Londoners [28].
Purpose of bus journey by income and time of day (2014) [28]
% During the day At night
Annual income bands All

People on low income
Car
Londoners living in households with a lower income are less likely to drive a car on
a frequent basis. Twenty-two per cent of all Londoners drive at least five days a
week compared to 15 per cent of Londoners living in a household with a lower
income [12].
Frequency of travelling by car (2013/14) [12]
% All All less
than
£20k
Less
than
£5k
£5k–
£9,999
£10k–
£14,999
£15k–
£19,999
£20k–
£24,999
Base (15,700) (5,510) (986) (1,628) (1,580) (1,316) (1,210)
5 or more days a week:
Driver 22 15 8 13 16 22 20
Passenger 9 9 5 8 10 9 10
3 or 4 days a week:
Driver 7 5 4 4 6 5 7
Passenger 10 9 7 8 11 9 11
2 days a week:
Driver 6 4 2 3 4 5 4
Passenger 14 12 9 11 13 15 14
1 day a week:
Driver 4 2 2 2 2 3 4
Passenger 15 14 15 14 14 13 15
At least once a fortnight:
Driver 1 1 - 1 1 - 1
Passenger 7 6 6 7 6 4 6
At least once a month:
Driver 1 1 - 1 1 1 1
Passenger 12 13 14 13 12 12 10
At least once a year:
Driver 3 2 2 2 2 2 3
Passenger 20 22 25 21 20 23 22
Not used in last year:
Driver 9 12 13 14 11 12 9
Passenger 8 11 10 13 9 10 9
Never used:
Driver 45 58 68 61 57 49 49
Passenger 5 6 9 6 5 4 4
Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Transport for London – People on low incomes 280

People on low income
Of Londoners aged 17 years old or over with household income of less than
£20,000, 54 per cent have a driving licence – lower than the 71 per cent of all
Londoners [12].
Proportion of Londoners aged 17 or over with any driving licence (2013/14) [12]
Income group
Holds a driving licence
(%)
All 71
Less than £20,000 54
Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Forty-five per cent of Londoners with household income of less than £20,000 have
household access to a car compared with 65 per cent of Londoners overall. This
declines to 27 per cent among Londoners in the lowest household income bracket
(less than £5,000) [12].
Proportion of Londoners in a household with access to a car (2013/14) [12]
% All Less
than
£20k
Less
than £5k
£5k–
£9,999
£10k–
£14,999
£15k–
£19,999
£20k–
£24,999
Base (15,700) (5,510) (986) (1,628) (1,580) (1,316) (1,210)
0 cars 35 55 73 60 48 42 34
1 car 46 39 26 37 44 46 52
2+ cars 20 6 1 2 7 12 14
Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Transport for London – People on low incomes 281

People on low income
Tube
Weekly use of the Tube among Londoners living in lower income households is
lower than Londoners overall (31 per cent of Londoners with household income
less than £20,000 compared with 39 per cent of all Londoners). The pattern is also
true for daily Tube travel, nine per cent of Londoners from a household with an
income of less than £20,000 travel daily on the Tube compared with 15 per cent of
all Londoners [12].
Frequency of travelling by Tube (2013/14) [12]
% All All less
than
£20k
Less
than
£5k
£5k–
£9,999
£10k–
£14,999
£15k–
£19,999
£20k–
£24,999
Base (15,700) (5,510) (986) (1,628) (1,580) (1,316) (1,210)
5 or more days a week 15 9 8 7 9 12 15
3 or 4 days a week 7 6 7 6 5 7 7
2 days a week 8 7 10 7 6 7 7
1 day a week 9 9 10 7 9 10 10
At least once a fortnight 8 7 7 8 8 7 7
At least once a month 15 14 12 15 14 13 14
At least once a year 25 27 23 25 28 30 26
Not used in last year 11 17 16 20 18 13 11
Never used 3 4 8 5 3 2 4
Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Transport for London – People on low incomes 282

People on low income
Cycling
Londoners in DE households are less likely than all Londoners to cycle (13 per cent
do so compared to 17 per cent of all Londoners). They are also less likely to know
how to cycle (77 per cent of DE Londoners compared with 83 per cent of all
Londoners) [17].
Proportion of Londoners who cycle (November 2014) [17]
% All DE
Base (2,192) (289)
Cyclist (sometimes uses a bike to get around London) 17 13
Non-cyclist (never uses a bike to get around London) 83 87
Proportion of Londoners able to ride a bike (November 2014) [17]
% All DE
Base (2,192) (289)
Can ride a bike 83 77
Cannot ride a bike 17 23
Frequency of travelling by bicycle (November 2014) [17]
% All DE
Base (2,192) (289)
5 or more days a week 4 2
3 or 4 days a week 5 4
2 days a week 3 3
1 day a week 2 1
At least once a fortnight 1 1
At least once a month 1 -
At least once a year 2 1
Not used in last year - -
Never used 83 87
Transport for London – People on low incomes 283

People on low income
We have developed a behavioural change model to look at Londoners’ readiness
to cycle or cycle more. Sixty-nine per cent classify themselves as being in the ‘precontemplation’
category, meaning that they either haven’t thought about cycling
or cycling more, or have thought about it but do not intend to do it. There is little
difference with DE Londoners: 55 per cent of those living in DE households will
never consider cycling, compared with 57 per cent of all Londoners [17].
Eight per cent of Londoners living in DE households are classified as being in the
‘sustained change’ category, meaning that they started cycling a while ago and are
still doing it occasionally or regularly. This is a similar level to all Londoners (10 per
cent) [17].
Behaviour change model of cycling (November 2014) [17]
% All DE
Base (all) (2,192) (289)
Pre-contemplation:
‘Have never thought about it, but would be unlikely to start in the future’
‘Have thought about it, but don’t intend starting in the future’
‘Have never thought about it, but could be open to it in the future’
Contemplation:
‘Thinking about starting soon’
Preparation:
‘Decided to start soon’
Change:
‘Have tried to start recently, but am finding it difficult’
‘Have started recently and am finding it quite easy so far’
Sustained change:
‘Started a while ago and am still doing it occasionally’
‘Started a while ago and am still doing it regularly’
Lapsed:
‘Started doing this but couldn’t stick to it’
69 67
10 12
3 5
2 2
10 8
6 7
Transport for London – People on low incomes 284

People on low income
Cycling schemes
Compared to all Londoners, people living in DE households are less likely to be
aware of Cycle Hire. Ninety-one per cent of all Londoners are aware, compared to
84 per cent of Londoners living in DE households [17].
Twenty-two per cent of casual Cycle Hire users (defined as not having a
membership key) live in a household with an annual income of £20,000 or less, and
five per cent of members live in a household with an annual income of £20,000 or
less [29].
Members of DE households are just as likely as all Londoners to say they will
(probably/ definitely) use Cycle Hire in the future (26 per cent of those living in DE
households compared with 27 per cent of all Londoners) [17].
Expected use of Cycle Hire in the future (November 2014) [17]
% All DE
Base (1,180) (154)
Yes, definitely/ probably 27 26
Yes, definitely 9 8
Yes, probably 18 18
No, probably not 30 26
No, definitely not 33 35
Not sure 10 12
Awareness of Cycle Superhighways is similar among those living in DE households
and all Londoners (39 per cent compared with 41 per cent of all Londoners) [17].
Members of DE households express a similar likelihood that they (probably/
definitely) expect to use them in future as all Londoners (20 per cent compared
with 23 per cent) [17].
Expected use of Cycle Superhighways in the future (November 2014) [17]
% All DE
Base (1,180) (154)
Yes, definitely/ probably 23 20
Yes, definitely 6 3
Yes, probably 17 17
No, probably not 28 27
No, definitely not 31 36
Not sure 17 16
Transport for London – People on low incomes 285

People on low income
Journey purpose
Reflecting the lower levels of employment among Londoners living in a household
with an income of less than £20,000 per year, journeys to a usual workplace make
up nine per cent of weekday journeys, compared with 20 per cent for all
Londoners. Other work-related journeys make up five per cent of journeys among
those with an income of less than £20,000 per year, compared with eight per cent
for all Londoners [12].
A greater proportion of journeys are completed for the purposes of shopping and
personal business (33 per cent for Londoners with household income of less than
£20,000 compared with 24 per cent all Londoners) [12].
Weekday journey purpose (2013/14) [12]
% All All less
than
£20k
Base – all trips by Londoners
Less
than
£5k
£5k–
£9,999
£10k–
£14,999
£15k–
£19,999
£20k–
£24,999
Shopping/personal business 24 33 38 34 33 29 22
Usual workplace 20 9 3 7 11 14 20
Leisure 23 24 26 25 23 24 23
Education 19 23 24 24 22 21 18
Other work-related 8 5 3 5 5 5 11
Other 6 6 6 6 6 7 6
Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Transport for London – People on low incomes 286

People on low income
Ticket types
Oyster pay as you go (PAYG) is used by smaller proportions of Londoners living in
DE households than all Londoners; 31 per cent of DE Londoners use Oyster PAYG
on any type of public transport compared with 58 per cent of all Londoners. A
similar pattern is observed for Oyster season tickets; 13 per cent of Londoners
living in DE households use one compared with 20 per cent of all Londoners [32].
Londoners in DE households are more likely to travel using a Freedom Pass than
all Londoners. Fifty-one per cent of Londoners living in DE households use a
Freedom Pass when travelling on public transport compared to 21 per cent of all
Londoners [32].
The use of contactless payment on public transport is lower among Londoners
living in DE households (10 per cent use contactless payment compared with 16
per cent of all Londoners) [32]. As with other ticket use, this is largely due to the
higher Freedom pass usage, related to the older age profile of people in DE
households.
Tickets and passes used on public transport (January 2015) [32]
%
Base: Public transport users:
All
(975)
DE
(152)
Freedom Pass 21 51
Oyster PAYG 58 31
Oyster Season ticket 20 13
Contactless payment 16 10
Cash/single/return 10 7
Any other Travelcard 7 2
Transport for London – People on low incomes 287

People on low income
Travelcards
Reflecting the differences observed in ticket use, 52 per cent of Londoners in
households with an income of less than £20,000 do not have an Oyster card
compared with 40 per cent of all Londoners [12].
Londoners living in lower income households are more likely to hold an older
person’s Freedom Pass than all Londoners (24 per cent of Londoners living in low
income households compared with 15 per cent of all Londoners) [12].
Ticket types held (2013/14) [12]
% All All less
than
£20k
Less
than
£5k
£5k–
£9,999
£10k–
£14,999
£15k–
£19,999
£20k–
£24,999
Base (15,700) (5,510) (986) (1,628) (1,580) (1,316) (1,210)
Have an Oyster card 60 48 50 44 45 54 60
Do not have an Oyster
card
40 52 50 56 55 46 40
Older person’s Freedom
Pass
15 24 23 27 24 21 16
Disabled person’s
Freedom Pass
2 4 6 5 3 2 1
Note that LTDS data in this report excludes children aged under five.
Even when looking only at lower income Londoners aged under 65 (who are
therefore not eligible for the older person’s Freedom Pass), Oyster card ownership
is lower than among the equivalent age group of all Londoners (60 per cent
Londoners aged under 65 from lower income household compared with 67 per
cent all Londoners aged under 65) [12].
Transport for London – People on low incomes 288

People on low income
Barriers
Barriers to greater public transport use
We have carried out several research programmes to investigate the barriers that
Londoners face when using public transport. Our findings from each of these
studies are in general agreement. However, it is worth noting that the issue of
barriers is complex and that the specific questions that we ask Londoners may
have an impact upon the response provided. The impact of specific barriers may
also be much more significant for some Londoners than others.
The most common barrier to increased public transport use, mentioned by 56 per
cent of Londoners living in DE households, is overcrowded services. This is similar
to the proportion of all Londoners who consider overcrowding to be a barrier (59
per cent) [14].
Londoners living in lower income households do express a number of differences
compared with all Londoners in terms of the barriers they face to using public
transport more often [14].
Londoners living in lower income households are more likely than all
Londoners to report barriers related to:
- Anti-social behaviour (mentioned by 41 per cent of Londoners living in a low
income household compared with 34 per cent of all Londoners)
- Fear of crime getting to/waiting for the bus/train (29 per cent compared with 24
per cent)
- Fear of crime on the bus/train (28 per cent compared with 23 per cent)
- Fear about knife crime (25 per cent compared with 20 per cent)
- Fear about the risk of accidents (13 per cent compared with 9 per cent)
Londoners living in lower income households are however less likely than all
Londoners to report barriers related to:
- Cost of tickets – although this is still the third most frequently mentioned barrier
(39 per cent compared with 45 per cent)
- Slow journey times (35 per cent compared with 41 per cent)
- Unreliable services (30 per cent compared with 37 per cent) [14]
At first glance, cost of tickets being mentioned less frequently amongst Londoners
living in lower income households as a barrier for using public transport more
often than all Londoners appears odd. However, we need to put this in context by
considering the higher proportion of Londoners living in lower income households
who have a Freedom pass and therefore do not pay directly for most public
transport [12].
Transport for London – People on low incomes 289

People on low income
Barriers to using public transport more often (prompted) (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]
% All DE
Base (4,005) (703)
Overcrowded services 59 56
Cost of tickets 45 39
Slow journey times 41 35
Unreliable services 37 30
Concern about antisocial behaviour 34 41
Dirty environment on the bus/train 28 30
Fear of crime getting to/ waiting for the
bus/train
24 29
Fear of crime on the bus/train 23 28
Fear about knife crime 20 25
Dirty environment getting to the bus/train 18 20
Fear of terrorist attacks 12 15
Graffiti 10 13
Lack of information on how to use public
transport
10 12
Risk of accidents 9 13
Don’t understand how to buy bus tickets 5 6
None of these 17 18
The barriers mentioned by higher proportions of Londoners living in DE
households compared to all Londoners may be influenced by other demographic
variables aside from household income. Those with lower household incomes are
more likely to be women, older, disabled and/or from a BAME ethnic group.
Taking ‘fear of crime on the bus/train’ as an example, this barrier is also more likely
to be mentioned by women and BAME Londoners.
Transport for London – People on low incomes 290

People on low income
Safety and security
We use a typology of worry to monitor the perceptions of Londoners with regard
to their personal security while using public transport in London. The typology
classifies people into:
Unworried – reports no general worry and no episodes of recent worry
Unexpressed fear – reports no general worry, but specific recent episodes
Anxious – reports general worry, but no specific recent episodes
Worried – reports general worry, and specific recent episodes
Don’t know
The majority of Londoners fall into the ‘unworried’ category which means that
they are generally unworried about their personal security in London, and have
experienced no incidents that made them feel worried in the last three months.
DE Londoners are just as likely to be ‘unworried’ as all Londoners (both 75 per
cent) [14].
Typology of worry (Jan/Apr/Jul/Oct 2014) [14]
% All Londoners DE
Base (4,005) (703)
Unworried 75 75
Unexpressed 11 10
Anxious 6 8
Worried 6 5
Don’t know 2 2
There is little difference in the level of concern about personal security when using
public transport between all Londoners and those living in a DE household [14].
Levels of concern about personal security when using public transport in London (Jan/
Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]
% All Londoners DE Londoners
Base (4,005) (703)
Not at all worried 42 40
A little bit worried 45 45
Quite a bit worried 9 10
Very worried 3 3
Don’t know 1 1
Transport for London – People on low incomes 291

People on low income
DE Londoners are just as likely to take precautions against crime and antisocial
behaviour while travelling on public transport as all Londoners (39 per cent DE
Londoners compared with 38 per cent all Londoners). The most common
precautions include keeping an eye on their belongings (33 per cent of DE
Londoners taking precautions mentioned this), sitting by others (29 per cent of DE
Londoners taking precautions mentioned this) and travelling with someone else
(24 per cent of DE Londoners taking precautions mentioned this). Among DE
Londoners who do take precautions, a slightly larger proportion, albeit the
minority, say that these precautions affect their quality of life negatively ‘quite a
bit’ or ‘very much’ (12 per cent of DE Londoners compared with nine per cent of all
Londoners) [14].
Precautions taken (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]
% All DE Londoners
Base (all who take precautions) (1,507) (262)
Sat near to other people 34 29
Look after my belongings 29 33
Travelled with someone else 23 24
Travel at a different time of day 16 12
Used a different route 15 13
Stay aware/vigilant 15 17
Avoided using that transport type 12 9
Only take necessities with me 3 5
Carry a personal alarm 3 2
Note responses 2% or below among all Londoners not shown.
In terms of actual experiences, the proportion of DE Londoners and all Londoners
who have felt worried about their personal security when using public transport in
London in the past three months is very similar (15 per cent of DE Londoners
compared with 17 per cent all of Londoners). Those who have felt worried about
their personal security when using public transport in the last three months were
asked on which type of transport they experienced this event. Those living in DE
households, in common with all Londoners, are most likely to have experienced
their last worrying event on a bus (43 per cent of DE Londoners; 48 per cent of all
Londoners). Considerably more DE Londoners experienced an event on a train
compared with all Londoners (38 per cent compared with 19 per cent respectively).
However, far fewer people from DE households experienced an event on the Tube
(16 per cent of DE Londoners compared with 30 per cent of all Londoners). This
may reflect the lower use of the Tube amongst Londoners living in lower income
households [14].
Crime and antisocial behaviour concerns affect the frequency of travel during the
day ‘a little’ or ‘a lot’ for some Londoners. This is more the case for Londoners
living in a DE household than all Londoners (29 per cent of DE Londoners using the
public transport during the day compared to 22 per cent of all Londoners) [14].
Transport for London – People on low incomes 292

People on low income
Proportion of Londoners for whom concerns over crime/antisocial behaviour affect the
frequency of their public transport use ‘a lot/a little’ (Jan/ Apr/ Jul/ Oct 2014) [14]
% All Londoners DE Londoners
Base (4,005) (703)
Overall: During the day/after dark
Underground/buses/National Rail 53 52
During the day:
Underground/buses/National Rail 22 29
Underground 16 20
Buses 17 20
National Rail 11 13
After dark:
Underground/buses/National Rail 49 46
Underground 37 37
Buses 42 38
National Rail 29 27
Transport for London – People on low incomes 293

People on low income
Customer satisfaction
Overall satisfaction
We measure overall satisfaction with various transport types in London on an 11-
point scale, with 10 representing extremely satisfied and zero representing
extremely dissatisfied. We then scale this up to 100.
We have standardised satisfaction ratings, as laid out in the table below. This
allows TfL to apply consistent analysis across a wide range of satisfaction
research.
Average rating Level of satisfaction
Under 50
Very low/weak/poor
50-54 Low/weak/poor
55-64 Fairly/relatively/quite low/weak/poor
65-69 Fair/reasonable
70-79 Fairly/relatively/quite good
80-84 Good or fairly high
85-90 Very good or high
90+ Excellent or very high
Satisfaction levels are very similar for those living in DE households or households
with a lower income and all customers [16].
For bus services, customers living in households with income of £20,000 or less
give a fairly good/high overall satisfaction rating of 85 out of 100, on par with the
mean score of 85 given by all Londoners. Likewise, Tube customers living in
households with an income of £20,000 or less give a similar satisfaction mean
rating of 85 out of 100 to the 84 given by all customers [16].
Transport for London – People on low incomes 294

People on low income
Overall satisfaction with transport types – all customers (2014/15) [16]
Satisfaction score (0-
Household income 20k Household income
All
100)
or less
over 20k
Bus services
Base (14,155) (5,947) (5,221)
Satisfaction score 85 85 86
Bus stations
Base (3,626) (1,188) (1,197)
Satisfaction score 78 80 79
Underground
Base (17,634) (4,532) (11,014)
Satisfaction score 84 85 84
Overground
Base (5,397) (1,255) (3,106)
Satisfaction score 83 83 83
Night buses
Base (910) (396) (390)
Satisfaction score 81 81 81
Trams
Base (4,329) (1,597) (1,802)
Satisfaction score 89 91 89
Victoria Coach Station
Base (1,204) (567) (448)
Satisfaction score 82 82 81
London River Service
Base (2,106) (199) (1,454)
Satisfaction score 90 90 90
Taxis
Base (569) (76) (427)
Satisfaction score 83 80 84
Private Hire Vehicles
Base (439) (92) (297)
Satisfaction score 80 77 81
DLR
Base (13,398) (3,453) (7,847)
Satisfaction score 89 89 89
Satisfaction is not shown for Dial-a-Ride and Woolwich Ferry as the data is not available for income or social grade.
Transport for London – People on low incomes 295

Score out of 100
People on low income
Bus
Customers using buses give an overall satisfaction score of 85 out of 100 which is
considered good or fairly high. Satisfaction is at the same level among customers
with household income of £20,000 or less who use the bus (85 out of 100) [16].
Overall satisfaction with buses over time [16]
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
78 79 79 79 80 81 82 81 80 81 82 83 85
76 77 78 78 77 79 80 79 80 80 82 83 85
All customers
Household income £20k or less
* Household income 20k or less.
Transport for London – People on low incomes 296

Score out of 100
People on low income
Satisfaction with value for money stands at 71 out of 100 for customers with
household income of £20,000 or less, in line with the score of 72 out of 100 for
customers overall. [16].
Satisfaction with value for money with buses over time [16]
100
90
80
70
60
78 77
80
77
72 72 71
74 74 73
71 72 73 74 73 73
69
71 72
66 67
68 66 68 70 71
50
40
30
20
10
0
All customers
Household income £20k or less
* Household income 20k or less.
Drivers of satisfaction
There is little difference between the main drivers of overall satisfaction among
customers living in a household with an annual income of less than £20,000 and all
customers, with ease of making a journey, journey time and comfort inside the
bus being the primary drivers of satisfaction [16].
Drivers of satisfaction for bus users [16]
All customers
Journey time
Household income

Score out of 100
People on low income
Tube
Among customers living in a low income household, overall satisfaction with the
Tube is fairly high and is in line with the score provided by customers overall (85
out of 100 customers with an annual household income of £20,000 or less
compared with 84 out of 100 for all customers) [16].
Overall satisfaction with the Tube over time [16]
100
90
80
70
60
78 80 80 81 80 79
75 76 78 78 76 77
83 83
79
82
79 79 79 80
85 84 85
83 83 84
50
40
30
20
10
0
All customers
Household income £20k or less
Transport for London – People on low incomes 298

Score out of 100
People on low income
Customers with a lower household income are slightly more likely than all
customers to be satisfied with the Tube offering value for money (71 out of 100
compared with 69 out of 100) [16].
Satisfaction with value for money with the Tube over time [16]
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
70 69 68 67 67 67
63 64 62 62 61 63
71 73
67 68 68 70 71
65 67 65
66 67 69
62
All customers
Household income 20k or less
Drivers of satisfaction
Tube use among those on a low income is mainly driven by journey time, ease of
making the journey and journey comfort. This is similar to the profile of all
customers [16].
Drivers of satisfaction for Tube users [16]
All customers
Ease of making journey
Length of Journey time
Comfort of journey
Length of time waited for train
Personal safety on train
Household income

People on low income
Overground
Satisfaction with the Overground is high among customers living in a household
with income of £20,000 or less and is in line with customers overall (83 out of 100
for customers with household income of £20,000 or less compared with 83 out of
100 overall) [16].
Overall satisfaction with London Overground over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score (0-100) All Household income
20k or less
Base 2014/15 (5,397) (1,255)
2013/14 82 82
2014/15 83 83
Value for money stands at 75 out of 100 among Overground users living in a
household with income of £20,000 or less, which is consistent with the score for all
customers (73 out of 100) [16].
Satisfaction with value for money with London Overground over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score (0-100) All Household income
20k or less
Base 2014/15 (5,182) (1,242)
2013/14 70 72
2014/15 73 75
Drivers of satisfaction
The condition of the train and ease of making journeys are important drivers for
London Overground customers [16].
Drivers of satisfaction for Overground users [16]
All customers
Ease of making your journey
Condition and state of repair of
the train
Feel valued as a customer
Comfort of the train
Information about service
disruptions on the train
Household income

People on low income
Docklands Light Railway (DLR)
Overall satisfaction with the DLR is high among customers using the network at
89 out of 100, and it is at the same level for those customers living in a household
with £20,000 income or less [16].
Value for money stands at 79 out of 100 among DLR users who are living in a
household with income of £20,000 or less, which is consistent with the all
customers score (77 out of 100) [16].
Drivers of satisfaction
Journey time, ease of making journeys and reliability of trains are the top drivers
for DLR overall satisfaction among customers living in households with an annual
income of less than £20,000. Ease of making the journey, comfort, journey length
and reliability of trains are the main drivers for all customers [16].
Drivers of satisfaction for DLR users [16]
All customers
Ease of making your journey
Comfort of the train
Length of journey time
Reliability of trains
Feel valued as a customer
Household income

People on low income
Trams
Overall satisfaction with trams is high among customers at 89 out of 100. This is
slightly higher among customers living in a household with income of £20,000 or
less (91 out of 100) [16].
Overall satisfaction with trams over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score (0-100) All Household income
20k or less
Base 2014/15 (4,329) (1,597)
2013/14 89 91
2014/15 89 91
Overall satisfaction with value for money on the tram network is quite good (78
out of 100) and it is in line with tram customers living in a household with income
of £20,000 or less [16].
Satisfaction with value for money with trams over time – all customers [16]
Satisfaction score (0-100) All Household income
20k or less
Base 2014/15 (2,824) (851)
2013/14 78 79
2014/15 78 78
Transport for London – People on low incomes 302

People on low income
Streets
Similar proportions of Londoners living in a DE household and all Londoners say
that they are satisfied with the streets after walking and car journeys in London.
Sixty-three per cent of DE Londoners are satisfied with their last walking journey
compared with 68 per cent of all Londoners (an insignificant difference) and 62 per
cent of DE Londoners are satisfied with their last car journey, in line with all
Londoners where 60 per cent are satisfied [34].
Overall satisfaction with streets and pavement after last journey over time – walking
journey [34]
Net fairly
All DE
satisfied/very satisfied
(%)
Base 2014/15 (957) (161)
2011 64 62
2012 68 66
2013 69 70
2014 68 68
2015 68 63
Overall satisfaction with streets and pavement after last journey over time - car journey
[34]
Net fairly
All DE
satisfied/very satisfied
(%)
Base 2014/15 (830) (133)
2011 54 58
2012 62 68
2013 57 57
2014 61 62
2015 60 62
Satisfaction with cycling journeys not shown due to small base size.
Transport for London – People on low incomes 303

People on low income
Transport for London Road Network (TRLN)
Satisfaction with the general impression of the TLRN is reasonable to fairly good.
Customers with a lower household income (£20,000 or less) give a score of 71 out
of 100 for walking, 72 out of 100 for travelling by bus, and 70 out of 100 for driving
or cycling on the TLRN [16].
Satisfaction score (0-100) All Household income
20k or less
Walking
Base 2014-15 (1,254) (222)
2013/14 70 72
2014/15 68 71
Travelling by bus
Base 2014-15 (4,620) (868)
2013/14 69 73
2014/15 71 72
Driving
Base 2014-15 (3,605) (464)
2013/14 67 69
2014/15 67 70
Cycling
Base 2014-15 (1,838) (287)
2013/14 69 *
2014/15 70 70
* Denotes small base size (data not shown in this report for base sizes of less than 50).
Transport for London – People on low incomes 304

People on low income
Access to information
Access to the internet
People living in households with lower incomes are significantly less likely to have
access to the internet compared with all Londoners; 79 per cent of people from DE
households have access compared with 92 per cent of all Londoners. The pattern
of lower internet access is seen across access at home, ‘on the move’ and from
work [15].
Access to the internet (Apr/ Oct 2014) [15]
% All Londoners DE Londoners
Base (2,001) (361)
Any access 92 79
Access at home 89 77
Access ‘on the move’ 61 35
Access at work 56 21
Younger Londoners living in DE households have high levels of internet access.
However, as there are many older people living in DE households and the
proportion of older people who access the internet is much lower, this brings down
the overall figure for DE Londoners [15].
Access to the internet by age (Apr/ Oct 2014) [15]
DE Londoners Base Accessing the internet (%)
16-64 (166) 89
65+ (195) 52
Reasons for internet use are broadly similar for Londoners in DE households and
all Londoners who access the internet. Although similar, the proportion of
Londoners living in DE households who access the internet and undertake each
internet activity is slightly lower than amongst all Londoners [15].
Key reasons for use include:
Email (90 per cent DE Londoners who access the internet compared with 94
per cent for Londoners overall)
Finding and sourcing information (83 per cent compared with 89 per cent
overall)
Accessing live travel information (70 per cent compared with 78 per cent
overall)
Maps and directions (69 per cent compared with 84 per cent overall)
Social media and networking (67 per cent compared with70 per cent overall)
Buying goods and services (62 per cent compared with 79 per cent overall)
Banking (57 per cent compared with 68 per cent overall)
Day-to-day travel plans (54 per cent compared with 67 per cent overall)
Transport for London – People on low incomes 305

People on low income
Education related (53 per cent compared with 64 per cent) [15]
Device usage and behaviour
Smartphone ownership is lower among DE Londoners than Londoners overall (58
per cent of DE Londoners compared with 77 per cent of all Londoners). However,
this is primarily due to the older age profile of DE Londoners; amongst DE
Londoners under the age of 65, smartphone ownership is 73 per cent, in line with
that of all Londoners [15].
Proportion of Londoners who use a smartphone (iPhone, Android, BlackBerry, other)
(Apr/ Oct 2014) [15]
% All Londoners DE Londoners
Base (2,001) (361)
Uses a smartphone 77 58
Proportion of Londoners living in DE households who use a smartphone (iPhone, Android,
BlackBerry, other) by age group (Apr/ Oct 2014) [15]
DE Londoners Base Use a smartphone (%)
16-64 (166) 73
65+ (195) 20
Use of the TfL website
Fifty-six per cent of Londoners living in a DE household access the TfL website
compared with 78 per cent of all Londoners [15].
Frequency of visiting the TfL website (Apr/ Oct 2014) [15]
% All DE
Base (2,001) (361)
Daily 9 9
Up to 3-4 times a week 21 11
Up to 3-4 times a month 20 12
About once a month 17 11
Less than once a month 11 12
Never 20 40
Don’t know/refused 2 4
As with internet access generally, a greater proportion of younger DE Londoners
access the TfL website than older DE Londoners [15].
Access to the TfL website by age [15]
DE Londoners Base Accessing the TfL website (%)
16-64 (166) 65
65+ (195) 32
Transport for London – People on low incomes 306

People on low income
Accessing information in the event of travel disruption
A lower proportion of Londoners living in DE households seek real-time
information than all Londoners (81 per cent compared with 89 per cent). Fortyfour
per cent seek out staff, listen for announcements or look out for information
(compared to 42 per cent of all Londoners) and 49 per cent use TfL’s website
(compared to 64 per cent of all Londoners) [15].
Transport for London – People on low incomes 307

Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual (LGB) Londoners
Summary: Lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) Londoners
Key findings
Londoners who identify themselves as being lesbian, gay or bisexual total 2.5 per cent
of the population [13]
Five per cent of people living in a couple in Inner London are in a same-sex relationship
[2]
LGB Londoners report a similar level of barriers to using public transport more
frequently as all Londoners, with overcrowded services, cost of tickets and slow
journey times being the three most commonly mentioned factors [70]
We are collecting data to find out more about LGB Londoners’ perceptions of safety
and security while travelling on public transport. Our initial findings indicate a greater
impact upon frequency of travel among LGB Londoners compared with all Londoners.
However, we need to research this further [70]
For some LGBT people, their fears about intimidation and/or abuse affect their travel
behaviour [98]
In this chapter we focus upon the experiences of LGB people. Transgender Londoners
are included in some of the older research findings that we present. We will include our
future research on transgender Londoners in the chapter on women.
Profile of lesbian, gay and bisexual Londoners
London has a higher proportion of adults who identify as lesbian, gay or bisexual
(LGB) than any other region of the UK. In London, 2.5 per cent of people consider
themselves to be lesbian, gay or bisexual [13].
Across the whole of the UK, 1.5 per cent of people identify themselves as LGB.
LGB people are slightly more likely to be men than women (58 per cent are men
and 42 per cent women) and are more likely to be younger (2.6 per cent of 16 to
24year olds, compared with 0.4 per cent of 65 year olds or older across the whole
of the UK) 12 [13].
Londoners living in a couple are more likely to be in a same-sex relationship in
Inner London than Outer London; five per cent of people living as a couple in Inner
London are in a same-sex relationship compared with 1.8 per cent in Outer
London boroughs [2].
12 Please note that approximately five per cent of people interviewed did not give a response to this
question.
Transport for London – Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual (LGB) Londoners 308

Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual (LGB) Londoners
Barriers
Very few differences exist between heterosexual and LGB Londoners regarding
barriers to increased public transport use, and we observed the same general
profile of barriers for both groups [70].
We are still collecting data around perceptions of safety and security. However,
initial indications are that LGB Londoners have a slightly higher level of worry than
all Londoners and appear to be more likely to have their frequency of public
transport use affected by concerns around crime and anti-social behaviour
(differences are not statically significant, although we expect that this is because
of the limited sample size available at present) [70].
Fears of intimidation and/or abuse are sometimes mentioned by LGBT Londoners
as barriers for increased public transport use. The extent to which these fears
affect travel behaviour depends on people’s personalities, previous experiences
and the degree to which they perceive themselves as being visibly LGBT [98].
Although not held by TfL, there are a number of reports available on more generic
research issues concerning sexual orientation published by Stonewall. You can
find these at
http://www.stonewall.org.uk/what_we_do/research_and_policy/default.asp
Transport for London – Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual (LGB) Londoners 309

Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual (LGB) Londoners
Introduction
London is home to the largest lesbian, gay and bisexual (LGB) population in the
UK. London’s LGB population is diverse, although it has a younger age profile than
the wider population of London [13].
Surveys rarely collect and analyse data by sexual orientation. Therefore the data in
this chapter is predominantly derived from the Office for National Statistics
Integrated Household Survey and our own research into safety and security while
travelling in London.
Please note that the differences highlighted between groups of individuals in this
chapter may well be influenced by a number of factors other than sexual
orientation, with age, gender, income and education all affecting perceptions
towards travel in London.
We added a question in October 2014 to the safety and security survey to identify
how Londoners think of themselves, whether ‘heterosexual or straight’, ‘Gay or
Lesbian’, ‘Bisexual’ or other. This data now allows us to provide indicative
reporting of results comparing all Londoners to LGB Londoner responses.
As this is a new addition to the survey, the time period covered in the results
presented in this section of the report is different from the other sections, and so
any direct comparison between other equality groups and LGB Londoners should
be made with care.
Results are available for studying the travel perceptions and experiences of
Londoners who consider themselves to be LGB and LGB and ‘other’ [70].
Transport for London – Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual (LGB) Londoners 310

Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual (LGB) Londoners
Profile of LGB Londoners
People who identify themselves as LGB total 2.5 per cent of London’s population.
This is higher than the UK average; 1.5 per cent of people across the country as a
whole identify themselves as LGB. In London, 7.2 per cent of people declined to
reveal their sexual identity as part of the ONS survey or said they did not know, 0.4
per cent responded by selecting ‘other’, and the remaining 89.9 per cent said
heterosexual [13].
Sexual identity in London and the UK (Jan–Dec 2012) [13]
% London UK
Heterosexual 89.9 93.5
Lesbian/gay/bisexual 2.5 1.5
Other 0.4 0.3
Don’t know/refusal/non-response 7.2 4.7
Base: 178,197.
Measuring the proportion of LGB people in the population is challenging as some
people do not define themselves with a particular sexual identity and many people
consider this to be a private topic. The ONS asks questions focused on sexual
identity (how people perceive themselves) as opposed to sexual attraction,
behaviour and/or orientation 13 .
Other sources quote higher proportions. These higher reported proportions of
LGB Londoners may also reflect the use of definitions broader than ‘sexual
identity’. According to TfL research that we conducted in late 2014/early 2015, 3.7
per cent of Londoners are LGB and 4.8 answer that they are either LGB or ‘other’
[101].
Stonewall states on its website that:
‘The Government is using the figure of five to seven per cent of the population
which Stonewall feels is a reasonable estimate. However, there is no hard data on
the number of lesbians, gay men and bisexuals in the UK as no national census has
ever asked people to define their sexuality.’ [99].
13 Those completing the survey face-to-face are asked: ‘Which of the options on this card best
describes how you think of yourself?’ Those completing the survey over the telephone are asked: ‘I
will now read out a list of terms people sometimes use to describe how they think of themselves…as I
read the list again please say ‘yes’ when you hear the option that best describes how you think of
yourself.’
Transport for London – Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual (LGB) Londoners 311

Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual (LGB) Londoners
At the time of the 2011 Census, 2.9 per cent of people living in a couple in London
were in a same-sex relationship; across the UK as a whole the figure is 1.5 per cent.
The proportion of same-sex couples varies considerably across London, with
couples living in Inner London boroughs most likely to be in a same-sex
relationship; five per cent of Inner Londoners living in a couple were in a same-sex
relationship compared with 1.8 per cent of Outer Londoners [2].
The boroughs with the highest proportion of couples living in a same-sex
relationship are the City of London (8.6 per cent), Southwark (seven per cent),
Lambeth (6.8 per cent) and Islington (6.2 per cent) [2].
London is also home to the largest proportion of civil partnerships; 24 per cent of
civil partnerships formed in 2013 were in the Capital [102].
LGB people are slightly more likely to be men than women (58 per cent are men
and 42 per cent women across the whole of the UK) and more likely to be younger
(2.6 per cent of 16 to 24 year olds, compared with 0.4 per cent of 65 year olds or
older across the whole of the UK) 14 [13].
Research by ONS in 2010 shows that people identifying themselves as LGB within
the UK are slightly more likely to be white than heterosexual people (93 per cent
of LGB people are white compared to 91 per cent of heterosexual people). This
finding should be interpreted with caution when extrapolating to London, since
the proportion of Londoners who are from a BAME group is higher than for the UK
as a whole [100].
LGB people are also more likely to be in managerial and professional occupations
(42 per cent) compared to heterosexual people (31 per cent) [100].
14 Please note that approximately five per cent of people interviewed did not give a response to this
question.
Transport for London – Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual (LGB) Londoners 312

Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual (LGB) Londoners
It is important to note that people from different backgrounds and occupations
have varying levels of openness about identifying themselves as LGB in surveys,
and so caution needs to be applied when interpreting these results.
Demographic profile according to sexual identity (2009/10) (UK) [100]
% Heterosexual LGB
Base (225,819) (3,574)
Gender
Men 49 55*
Women 51 45*
Age
16-24 15 18
25-44 34 47
45-64 32 27
65+ 20 8
Ethnicity
White 91 94
BAME 9 7
Social grade
Managerial and professional occupations 31 42
Intermediate occupations 16 15
Routine and manual occupations 29 23
Never worked and long-term unemployed 6 5
Not classified 18 15
*More recent research has been undertaken into sexual identity by ONS, but the 2010 data release provides the greatest
profiling information. The most recent ONS Household survey data on sexual identity shows 58 per cent of LGB people to be
men and 42 per cent women.
Transport for London – Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual (LGB) Londoners 313

Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual (LGB) Londoners
Barriers
We have carried out several research programmes to investigate the barriers that
Londoners face when using public transport. Findings from each of these studies
are in general agreement. However, it is worth noting that the issue of barriers is
complex and the specific questions that we ask of Londoners may impact on the
response provided. The impact of specific barriers may also be much more
significant for some Londoners than others.
There is little difference between the barriers identified by LGB and all Londoners
(although it is worth noting that our research includes a reasonably small number
of LGB Londoners). The most common barrier to increased public transport use,
mentioned by 56 per cent of LGB Londoners, is overcrowded services; this is
similar to the proportion of all Londoners who consider overcrowding to be a
barrier (58 per cent). Cost of tickets and slow journey times are also mentioned as
barriers to public transport use by LGB and all Londoners (44 per cent of LGB
Londoners and 42 per cent of all Londoners mention cost of tickets and 44 per
cent of LGB Londoners and 41 per cent of all Londoners mention slow journey
times) [70].
Barriers to using public transport more frequently (prompted) (Oct 14, Jan and Apr 15) [70]
% All
LGB LGB + ‘other’
Londoners Londoners Londoners
Base 2,698 78 108
Overcrowded services 58 56 56
Cost of tickets 42 44 43
Slow journey times 41 44 43
Concern about antisocial behaviour 31 33 34
Unreliable services 39 31 34
Dirty environment on the bus/train 25 23 24
Dirty environment getting to bus/train 17 21 21
Fear of crime on the bus/train 20 21 23
Fear of crime getting to the bus/train 21 17 19
Fear of knife crime 18 17 20
Risk of accidents 8 11 9
Fear of terrorist attacks 12 10 11
Graffiti 7 9 9
Lack of information on how to use services 9 2 4
Don’t understand how to buy tickets 5 1 1
None of these 19 18 18
Transport for London – Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual (LGB) Londoners 314

Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual (LGB) Londoners
Safety and security
We use a typology of worry to monitor the perceptions of Londoners with regard
to their personal security while using public transport in London. The typology
classifies people into:
Unworried – reports no general worry and no episodes of recent worry
Unexpressed fear – reports no general worry, but specific recent episodes
Anxious – reports general worry, but no specific recent episodes
Worried – reports general worry, and specific recent episodes
Don’t know
The majority of Londoners fall into the ‘unworried’ category, which means that
they are generally unworried about their personal security in London and have
experienced no incidents that made them feel worried in the last three months.
A lower proportion of LGB Londoners are considered ‘unworried’ than among all
Londoners (69 per cent compared with 76 per cent). However this difference is not
statistically significant because of the low sample size (this is being built up over
time with increased waves of the tracking survey) [70].
Typology of worry (Oct 14, Jan and Apr 15) [70]
%
All
LGB
LGB + ‘other’
Londoners Londoners Londoners
Base 2,698 78 108
Unworried 76 69 68
Unexpressed 11 15 14
Anxious 6 4 4
Worried 5 10 12
Don’t know 2 1 2
LGB Londoners are less likely than all Londoners to say that they are ‘not at all
worried’ about personal security while using public transport in London. However,
they are no more likely to report that they are ‘very worried’ (again, these
differences are not statistically significant) [70].
Levels of concern about personal security when using public transport in London
(Oct 14, Jan and Apr 15) [70]
% All Londoners
LGB
LGB + ‘other’
Londoners Londoners
Base 2,698 78 108
Not at all worried 43 34 33
A little bit worried 44 51 50
Quite a bit worried 9 10 11
Very worried 3 3 5
Don’t know 1 - 1
Transport for London – Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual (LGB) Londoners 315

Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual (LGB) Londoners
Twenty-five per cent of LGB Londoners have experienced a worrying event on
public transport in the past three months compared with 16 per cent of all
Londoners; again, while these numbers indicate a variance, we cannot say that
this difference is statistically significant due to a smaller sample size of LGB
Londoners [70].
Crime and antisocial behaviour concerns affect the frequency of travel during the
day ‘a lot/a little’ for some Londoners. As with other indicators, current sample
sizes do not allow for statistical significance calculations. However, it appears that
the frequency of public transport use is affected more for LGB Londoners than all
Londoners by concerns over crime and anti-social behaviour [70].
Proportion of Londoners for whom concerns over crime/antisocial behaviour affect the
frequency of their public transport use ‘a lot/a little’ (Oct 14, Jan and Apr 15) [70]
% All
Londoners
LGB
Londoners
LGB + ‘other’
Londoners
Base 2,698 78 108
Overall: During the day/after dark
Underground/buses/National Rail 54 58 58
During the day:
Underground/buses/National Rail 25 31 31
Underground 18 23 23
Buses 19 22 21
National Rail 12 10 13
After dark:
Underground/buses/National Rail 49 56 56
Underground 37 41 40
Buses 43 51 50
National Rail 29 36 37
From our research that investigates the travel barriers faced by LGBT people, fear
of intimidation and/or abuse emerged as a potential barrier. Modifications to
travel behaviour as a result of such fears are thought to depend on many factors,
including people’s personalities, previous experiences and the degree to which
they perceive themselves as visibly LGBT [98].
For some, particularly disabled LGBT people, hate crime is a particular concern, as
are the difficulties experienced when reporting it. However, we are not aware of
any research findings that are available on this topic related to transport in
London.
Although not held by TfL, there are a number of reports available on more generic
research issues concerning sexual orientation published by Stonewall. You can
find these at
http://www.stonewall.org.uk/what_we_do/research_and_policy/default.asp
Transport for London – Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual (LGB) Londoners 316

Bibliography
[1] Greater London Authority (2010) Mayor's Transport Strategy
[2] Office for National Statistics (2011) Census
[3] Greater London Authority (2011) The London Plan
[4] Greater London Authority (June 2015) 2014 Round of trend-based population projections:
update 03-2015
[5] Greater London Authority (August 2014) 2013 Round Ethnic Group Population projections:
update 12-2014
[6] Greater London Authority (July 2014) Births by birthplace of mother 2012: update 11-2014
[7] Transport for London (Sept. 2014) Long-term trends in travel behaviour
[8] Transport for London (2014) Travel in London Report 7
[9] NHS Information Centre (Dec. 2014) Prevalence of Childhood Obesity
[10] Greater London Authority (June 2015) The Mayor’s Climate Change Mitigation and Energy
Annual Report, 2013-14
[11] Transport for London (2015) Analysis of GLA Economic Data
[12] London Travel Demand Survey (2013/14)
[13] Office for National Statistics (2012) Integrated Household Survey
[14] Transport for London (2014) Attitudes to Safety and Security – Annual Report
[15] Transport for London (Apr/ Oct 14) Digital Media Monitoring combined analysis
[16] Transport for London (2014/15) Customer satisfaction surveys
[17] Transport for London (November 2014) Attitudes to cycling
[18] Greater London Authority (2007–2011) Casualty Tables
[19] Transport for London (2015) Attitudes to walking
[20] Greater London Authority (2012) Equal Life Chances for All
[21] Greater London Authority (2012) Round final ethnic group population projections
[22] Transport for London (2012) Single Equality Scheme and 2013 Progress Report
[23] Office for National Statistics (2001) Census
[24] Greater London Authority (2010) 20 facts about London’s culture
[25] Office for National Statistics (2011) Census Snapshot: Main Language
[26] Office for National Statistics (2010) Indices of Deprivation 2010
[27] Transport for London (2008–2011) Race Equality Scheme
[28] Transport for London (2014) Bus user survey
[29] Transport for London (July 2013) Barclays Cycle Hire customer satisfaction and usage
survey (BCH CSS)
[30] Transport for London (2014) Dial-a-Ride membership profile
[31] London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (2007) Road Safety of London’s Black and
Asian Minority Ethnic Groups
[32] Transport for London (January 2015) Oyster Tracker
[33] Transport for London (2015) Anti-social behaviour on buses
[34] Transport for London (2015) Streets Management CSS report
[35] Transport for London (1999–2000) London Residents Travel Survey
[36] Transport for London (2014/ 2015) Safer Travel at Night
[37] Transport for London (July 2013) Website Customer Satisfaction Report
[38] Office for National Statistics (2013) Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings (ASHE) Region by
occupation – provisional tables
Transport for London 317

[39] Greater London Authority (2010) Working Paper 45: Women in London’s Economy
– Update 2010
[40] Transport for London (2010) London Underground: Customer Insight Report: Accessibility
and Inclusion
[41] Transport for London (2012) Lift signage accessibility
[42] Transport for London (2004) Buggies on buses
[43] Transport for London (April 2012) Reducing conflict in the wheelchair space report
[44] Transport for London (2004) Buggies on Buses – Ergonomics
[45] Transport for London (2013) Project Guardian: Encouraging reports of unwanted sexual
behaviour on London’s transport network
[46] Transport for London (2014) Press release: More than 170 drivers arrested as part of illegal
cab touting crackdown
[47] Transport for London (2009) Customer Touchpoints Needs and Gaps, Part 1: Overview
[48] Transport for London (2013) Evaluation of customer information effectiveness
[50] Transport for London (2010) Safety issues for older drivers
[51] Department for Transport (2013) National Travel Survey, Table NTS0203
[52] Transport for London (2013) Social Media Monitoring of Accessibility
[53] Transport for London (2009) Understanding older people’s travel barriers and their impacts
[54] Department for Transport (2013) National Travel Survey, Trips to and from school by
main mode, region and area type
[55] Greater London Authority (2013) Diversity in London
[56] Transport for London (2008) Active Travel and Young People
[57] Transport for London (2009) Salient barriers and motivations for Near Market Cyclists
[58] Transport for London (Q2 2014/15) BCH CSS Casual users
[59] Transport for London (2012) Evaluation of the Accreditation Scheme (STAR)
[60] Transport for London (2013) Evaluation of Bike It
[61] Transport for London (2011) Teen Road Safety Campaign Territory Development Research
[62] Transport for London (Jan 2015) Teen Road Safety Campaign Evaluation
[63] Transport for London (2014) Understanding Children Cycling
[64] Transport for London (Feb 2015) Children's Traffic Club Monitoring
[65] Transport for London (2013) Understanding disabled people’s barriers
[66] Transport for London (2013) Review of accessible travel information
[67] Transport for London (2013) Business Plan
[68] Transport for London (2014 update) Your accessible transport network
[70] Transport for London (Oct 14, Jan, Apr 15) Attitudes to safety and security
[71] Transport for London (Jan 2013) Digital behaviours and expectations among the under 18
age group
[72] Transport for London (2012) Social media monitoring during the Games
[73] Transport for London (2012) Disabled Londoners during the Olympics qualitative research
[74] Transport for London corporate website link 'What we do:
Buses' http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/about-tfl/what-we-do/buses
[75] Transport for London (2015) PHV passengers with assistance dogs
[76] Transport for London (Apr 2014) Accessibility Social Media Temperature Check
[77] Transport for London (2012) Your Accessible Transport Network
[78] Transport for London (2013) Accessibility Campaign Creative Development
[79] Transport for London (2011) Accessibility and Disability
[80] Transport for London (2009) Mobility scooter access to London buses
Transport for London 318

[81] Transport for London (2013) Mobility Aid Recognition Scheme research
[82] Transport for London (2010) The journey experiences of young disabled people
[83] Transport for London (Q3 2014/15) AMTS Bus
[84] Transport for London (2014) Exploring the issue of Buses not letting customers on or off
[85] Office for National Statistics (2012) Disability-free life expectancy, sub-national estimates for
England, 2007–09
[86] Transport for London (2013) Accessible information on rail and Tube map – Desk research
[87] Transport for London (2013) Accessible Information on rail and Tube map
[88] Transport for London (Q3 2013/14) AMTS Pre-journey information
[89] Dial-a-Ride Local Area Meeting Evaluation (Mar 2014)
[90] Transport for London (2012) Green Park station – Step-free access report
[91] Transport for London (Sept 2014) Social media satisfaction survey
[92] Transport for London (2014) Signage Research
[93] Transport for London (2008) Legible London walking information – suitability for people
with disabilities
[94] Transport for London (2012) AMTS New Bus for London
[95] Transport for London (Nov 2014) Accessibility Social Media Temperature Check
[96] Office for National Statistics (2011) Census: NS-SeC of Household Reference Person (HRP)
– People, local authorities in the United Kingdom
[97] Transport for London (2015) Checking impact of Blue PTI Lights on Visually Impaired people
[98] Transport for London (2007) Understanding lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people’s
travel barriers
[99] Stonewall website (2014)
[100] Office for National Statistics (2010) Measuring Sexual Identity: An Evaluation Report
[101] Transport for London (2007) LGBT Profiling and Barriers to Tube Usage Report 2007/08
[102] Office for National Statistics (2012) Civil Partnership Formations
Transport for London 319

Glossary
16+ Oyster photocard Entitles those aged 16-18 to reduced travel fares
18+ Student Oyster
photocard
Accompanied journeys
Entitles those aged 18+ and in full-time education to a 30 per cent
reduction in various ticket costs
Journeys made for the purposes of market research where a
respondent and interviewer travel together
AMTS
Accessibility Mystery Travel Survey
Bus Pass
Congestion Charge
A ticket valid for a specified time giving unlimited travel on London
bus services
A pricing system which charges drivers for entering a defined zone
within specific time periods, aimed to reduce traffic congestion
Cycle Hire A public bicycle sharing scheme launched in London in 2011
Cycle Superhighways
Cycle routes that run between central London and Outer London
Deprivation
Deprivation deciles
DE social grade
Dial-a-Ride
Is calculated by combining a number of indicators (which cover
economic, social, environmental, housing, crime, education and
health issues) to give an understanding of quality of life
Areas divided into tenths based on the severity of deprivation
Refers to households where the chief income earner works in a
semi/unskilled manual profession, is a causal worker or is
unemployed with state benefits.
A door-to-door transport service for disabled people who are unable
(or almost unable) to use public transport services
Disabled person’s Freedom
Pass
Docklands Light Railway
(DLR)
A Freedom Pass specifically for disabled people
A light rail system in London
Transport for London 320

Door-to-door service
Ethnicity: Asian
Ethnicity: BAME (black,
Asian and minority ethnic)
Ethnicity: Black
Provide disabled people with transport from the exact journey
origin to the exact destination
Includes Asian Indian, Asian Pakistani, Asian Bangladeshi and Asian
other
Includes black Caribbean, black African, black other, Asian Indian,
Asian Pakistani, Asian Bangladeshi, Asian other, mixed white and
black Caribbean, mixed white and black African, mixed white and
Asian, mixed other, Chinese and other ethnic groups
Includes black Caribbean, black African and black other
Ethnicity: Mixed
Includes mixed white and black Caribbean, mixed white and black
African, mixed white and Asian and mixed other
Ethnicity: Other
Includes Arab and other ethnic groups
Ethnicity: White
Freedom Pass
Full car driving licence
Journey Planner
Includes white British, white Irish and white other
Concessionary pass issued free by local authorities to London
residents who meet an age criteria and to disabled people, which
gives unlimited travel within Greater London by National Rail, DLR,
London Tramlink, buses and Underground
A licence which permits the holder to drive cars (excludes
provisional driving licence)
TfL’s electronic search engine that allows users to plan their
journeys in advance of making them
Journey purpose
The reason for travelling
Journey purpose: Education
Travel as a pupil or student to or from school, college or university.
Or travel to accompany a child to or from school
Journey purpose: Leisure
Journey purpose: Other
Journey purpose: Other
work-related
Journey purpose: Shopping
and personal business
Travel to or from entertainment, sport or social activities
All travel purposes not otherwise classified, including accompanying
or meeting another person, and travelling to or from a place of
worship
Travel in the course of work, or to a location that is not the
traveller’s usual workplace
Travel for shopping and use of services such as hairdressers, drycleaners,
doctors, dentists, banks, solicitors etc
Transport for London 321

Journey purpose: Usual
workplace
LGB (Lesbian, gay and
bisexual)
LGBT (Lesbian, gay,
bisexual and transgender)
London taxi/black cab
Travel to or from the traveller’s usual place of work
Describes lesbian, gay and bisexual people
Describes lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people
Taxis available in London of the distinctive Hackney carriage style.
These taxis are available to flag down on the street
Londoners
People who live in one of the London boroughs
LTDS (London Travel
Demand Survey)
Older person’s Freedom
Pass
Oyster card
Oyster PAYG (pay as you go)
A major customer research project by TfL exploring Londoners’
travel patterns
A Freedom Pass specifically for those meeting an age criteria
A ‘smartcard’ that can be used as a season ticket (eg for bus passes
and Travelcards) or to pay for travel on a ‘pay as you go’ basis using
credit held on the card
Oyster cards can hold electronic funds of money. With each use, this
fund decreases until the user loads more money on to their card
Priority seating
Seats available on public transport for those less able to stand
Public transport
Senior/Disabled Persons
Railcard
STaN (Safer Travel at Night)
Taxi/minicab (PHV: private
hire vehicle)
Taxicard
Travelcard
Trip
Any of the following transport modes: bus, tram, London
Underground, DLR, London Overground, rail, taxis and minicabs
Senior Railcard entitles those aged 60 and over to a third off rail
travel across Britain. The Disabled Persons Railcard offers a third off
rail travel across Britain for disabled people
An initiative to reduce the use of illegal (unbooked) minicabs in
London, specifically targeted at women aged 16-34
Other forms of taxi which are not London taxis/black cabs. These
taxis should be booked in advance
Provides subsidised door-to-door transport in taxis and private hire
vehicles for disabled people
A ticket valid for unlimited travel on National Rail, buses, DLR,
London Tramlink and Underground, subject to certain conditions
within specific fare zones and for a specified time period
A complete door-to-door movement by an individual to achieve a
specific purpose (eg to go from home to work)
Transport for London 322

Trip-chaining
Trip rate
Under 16 Oyster photocard
Unequivalised household
income
Working full-time
Working part-time
Young Person’s Railcard (16-
25 Railcard)
Zip card
Journeys which have separate stages for consecutive purposes.
Taking a child to school and then completing personal business is an
example of trip-chaining
The number of trips made per person per day
Entitles children under the age of 16 to free travel on buses and
trams, and reduced travel on the Tube, DLR, Overground and some
National Rail services
A measure of household income that does not take household size
and composition into account
People in paid employment normally working for more than 30
hours a week
People in paid employment working for not more than 30 hours a
week
Entitles those aged 16-25 to a third off rail travel across Britain
Refers to Oyster photocards which entitle young people to travel at
a free or discounted rate
Transport for London 323

Appendix A: Equality groups in London boroughs
The data tables on the following pages give the proportion of equality groups in
each London borough. The proportion of BAME, women, older, younger, disabled
people and Londoners with low incomes are listed in order of highest proportion.
Proportion of BAME residents in each London borough [2]
Borough %
Newham 71
Brent 64
Harrow 58
Redbridge 57
Tower Hamlets 55
Ealing 51
Hounslow 49
Waltham Forest 48
Southwark 46
Lewisham 46
Hackney 45
Croydon 45
Lambeth 43
Barking and Dagenham 42
Haringey 39
Enfield 39
Hillingdon 39
Westminster 38
Greenwich 38
Barnet 36
Merton 35
Camden 34
Islington 32
Hammersmith and Fulham 32
Kensington and Chelsea 29
Wandsworth 29
Kingston upon Thames 26
City of London 21
Sutton 21
Bexley 18
Bromley 16
Richmond upon Thames 14
Havering 12
Transport for London 324

Proportion of women residents in each London borough [2]
Borough %
Bromley 52
Bexley 52
Havering 52
Enfield 52
Wandsworth 52
Barking and Dagenham 52
Barnet 52
Croydon 52
Sutton 51
Hammersmith and Fulham 51
Richmond upon Thames 51
Kingston upon Thames 51
Lewisham 51
Camden 51
Islington 51
Kensington and Chelsea 51
Merton 51
Harrow 51
Haringey 51
Southwark 51
Redbridge 51
Hackney 50
Greenwich 50
Hillingdon 50
Lambeth 50
Waltham Forest 50
Ealing 50
Hounslow 50
Brent 50
Westminster 49
Tower Hamlets 48
Newham 48
City of London 45
Transport for London 325

Proportion of older residents in each London borough [2]
Borough %
Havering 18
Bromley 17
Bexley 16
Harrow 14
Sutton 14
City of London 14
Richmond upon Thames 14
Barnet 13
Kingston upon Thames 13
Hillingdon 13
Croydon 12
Enfield 12
Redbridge 12
Merton 12
Kensington and Chelsea 12
Westminster 11
Ealing 11
Hounslow 11
Camden 11
Brent 10
Barking and Dagenham 10
Greenwich 10
Waltham Forest 10
Hammersmith and Fulham 9
Islington 9
Lewisham 9
Haringey 9
Wandsworth 9
Southwark 8
Lambeth 8
Hackney 7
Newham 7
Tower Hamlets 6
Transport for London 326

Proportion of younger residents in each London borough [2]
Borough %
Newham 39
Barking and Dagenham 38
Tower Hamlets 37
Enfield 35
Greenwich 35
Hackney 34
Hillingdon 34
Waltham Forest 34
Redbridge 34
Lewisham 33
Croydon 33
Brent 33
Haringey 32
Hounslow 32
Barnet 32
Bexley 32
Southwark 32
Harrow 32
Ealing 32
Kingston upon Thames 32
Lambeth 31
Camden 31
Sutton 30
Havering 30
Merton 30
Islington 30
Hammersmith and Fulham 29
Bromley 29
Richmond upon Thames 28
Wandsworth 28
Westminster 27
Kensington and Chelsea 26
City of London 18
Transport for London 327

Proportion of disabled residents in each London borough [2]
Borough %
City of London 17
Havering 17
Barking and Dagenham 16
Islington 16
Bexley 16
Redbridge 15
Enfield 15
Waltham Forest 15
Greenwich 15
Harrow 15
Bromley 15
Croydon 15
Newham 14
Tower Hamlets 14
Hackney 14
Westminster 14
Barnet 14
Camden 14
Haringey 14
Brent 14
Hillingdon 14
Lewisham 14
Southwark 14
Sutton 14
Ealing 14
Hounslow 14
Lambeth 13
Hammersmith and Fulham 13
Merton 13
Kingston upon Thames 12
Kensington and Chelsea 12
Wandsworth 11
Richmond upon Thames 11
Transport for London 328

Proportion of residents on lower income in each London borough [12]
Borough %
Brent 59
Harrow 57
Tower Hamlets 55
Islington 44
Barking and Dagenham 43
Hackney 42
Haringey 42
Southwark 40
Lambeth 39
Camden 39
Lewisham 37
Enfield 37
Newham 37
Waltham Forest 37
Greenwich 35
Hammersmith and Fulham 35
Bexley 34
Westminster 34
Croydon 33
Barnet 33
City of London 32
Ealing 32
Hillingdon 31
Kensington and Chelsea 31
Redbridge 31
Havering 30
Sutton 28
Hounslow 26
Bromley 26
Wandsworth 25
Merton 25
Kingston upon Thames 23
Richmond upon Thames 23
Transport for London 329

Transport for London 330