INDEPENDENT MOBILITY AMONG TEENAGERS: AN EXPLORATION ...

INDEPENDENT MOBILITY AMONG TEENAGERS: AN EXPLORATION OF TRAVEL TO AFTER-SCHOOL ACTIVITIES

Kelly J. Clifton Graduate Program in Urban and Regional Planning 345 Jessup Hall University of Iowa Iowa City, IA 52242 Telephone: (319) 353-2955; Fax: (319) 335-3330 Email: [email protected]

Submitted: November 18, 2003 Word Count: 4698 Number of Figures: 6

TRB 2003 Annual Meeting CD-ROM

Paper revised from original submittal.

ABSTRACT This paper examines the degree of independent pursuit of travel and activities by teenage populations. Specifically, the paper sets out to explore the kinds of after-school trips that teenagers make, the degree of independence in their travel, and the characteristics of those teenagers who are granted greater license to travel independently. The research design employs data from the 1995 Nationwide Personal Transportation Survey to investigate these questions. In particular, the first trip made directly after school is examined in order to evaluate the degree of independence in travel. The results demonstrate that as teenagers age, they gain independence in their daily travels. However, this independence comes with increased reliance upon the automobile. Younger teens are using alternative modes at a much higher rate than older teens, if only for the trip home from school but they appear to abandon walking and transit use as soon as the automobile becomes an option.


2


INTRODUCTION The carhops, drag races, and drive-ins of the 1950s are symbolic of the freedom that the automobile has granted America’s teenagers. Ironically, the personal freedom and choice that the general public has gained by the automobile may come at the expense of independent mobility and choices for today’s adolescent, particularly those not yet old enough to drive. Public transit and other alternative modes may have the potential to offer greater autonomy for older children. However, the limited transportation choices and the low-density, segregated land use patterns of American cities may hold teens and their chauffeuring parents captive to the private automobile. Even when these alternative forms of transportation exist, the fear of crime and threats to personal safety, the increased pressures on time, and an increasing participation in structured activities contribute to a population segment that may have only experienced their hometown from behind the windshield of a car. This paper examines the degree of independent pursuit of activities and travel by teenage populations. Specifically, the paper sets out to explore the following questions: • What types of after-school trips do teenagers make? • How do teenagers meet their transportation needs and how independently do they travel? • How do travel patterns differ by age cohort? • What do these results lend to public policy? The rest of the paper is organized as follows. A discussion of the importance of studying teenage travel will be followed by a brief review of the literature on teenagers and transportation. Next, the methods and data used to investigate these questions are presented and include data from the 1995 Nationwide Personal Transportation Survey. In particular, trips made directly after school are examined in order to get at the degree of independence in travel. Results from the analysis of these data are presented and followed by a discussion of their relationship to transportation planning. WHY STUDY TEENAGE TRAVEL? Teenagers are poised at the cusp of adulthood. On one hand, their activity participation and mobility are constrained by parental consent and age restrictions on driving. On the other, their burgeoning maturity grants them increasing license to make independent decisions and spend time without the supervision of adults. This unique juncture in a person’s life proves an interesting time to study his or her travel behavior. The automobile plays an important role in shaping teenagers’ lives and transportation policies. Travel by the private automobile is the mode of choice for most Americans and teenagers are no exception. The automobile is the predominant mode of travel for children aged 10 to 15 years (1). This places an additional travel burden on parents as they chauffeur their younger teens to activities. Obtaining a drivers license is a significant rite of passage for most teenagers, symbolizing independence and freedom from parental control. Many parents frequently support the increased autonomy that accompanies their children’s ability to drive as it relieves their chauffeuring responsibilities and allows teenagers to contribute more to household errands (2). But with addition of a driver, these households must bear an increase in transportation expenditures, including the cost of additional vehicle purchases and insurance.


3


The safety issues surrounding young drivers cannot be overlooked. Young drivers are involved in a disproportionately higher number of motor-vehicle crashes than their older counterparts (3), due in part, to their inexperience, immaturity, and lack of judgment (4). The number of young drivers aged 15 to 19 is expected to rise as much as 25% over the next 15 years (5) and this has important implications for traffic safety and future directions of transportation policy. For these reasons, teenage travel patterns warrant closer inspection. Understanding more about how American teenagers travel may provide insight into how policy can respond to their current mobility needs and their preferences and behaviors. Efforts to divert Americans out of their cars, improve access, and increase the retail and other non-work opportunities available in and near residential neighborhoods may find teenagers to be responsive targets. At the same time, these policies may address concerns about safety, additional household driving burden, and the associated costs with automobile use. But a better understanding of current teenage travel and its contribution to household travel demand is necessary before policy can respond to this need.


4


RESEARCH ON TEENAGERS AND TRANSPORTATION The research examining the transportation needs of children and teens has identified a number of factors related to teenagers’ travel and their independent mobility. These include relationships between travel and socio-demographic factors, geography, parental permissiveness, vehicular crash rates, and trends in activity participation and structure. A brief review of this literature follows. Children’s inability to travel independently and the resulting chauffeuring responsibilities of adults have contributed to the examination of the interdependencies that exist between household members in organizing activities and travel. Children have been included as a variable in transportation studies in order to determine the influence of family responsibilities on household travel. The presence of children in the household has long been identified as an important constraint on scheduling activities and trip making (6, 7, 8, 9). This is particularly true for women; studies have shown that women bear most of the responsibility for chauffeuring children, making more trips to serve passengers than men (10, 11, 12, 13). The lack of access to means of independent movement may contribute to children’s reliance on adults for most of their travel. In a study by Hillman (14), few teenagers had their own automobiles or scooters and while many owned bicycles, they were used infrequently as a means of transport. However, walking has been shown to be a popular mode for teens regardless of the number of cars available in their household, and in some cases preferred over public transit (15). Children’s travel differs by income, gender, age, and geographic location (16). Older children tend to have a greater spatial range of activities. Girls, younger children, and teens from higher income households tend to be driven by car more than their counterparts. Urban children are more likely to walk or take transit than those residing in suburban locations. On average, suburban children travel longer distances to activities. They also tend to bicycle and travel by car more. Parental permission plays a role in children’s travel. Parents’ willingness to grant children the right to travel alone or without adult supervision is on the decline. Hillman et al. (17) examined the issue of independent mobility among Britain’s school children aged 7 to 15 years. The authors identified a number of indicators of independent mobility, which include: the “license” to cross roads, go to places other than school on their own, come home from school alone, go out after dark, use the buses, and cycle on main roads. Their findings indicate that children in 1990 were granted fewer licenses and receive these privileges at a much older age than children in the 1970s. The degree to which permission to travel alone is granted varies by age, sex, and local traffic conditions (18). The number of freedoms increases with age and boys are typically granted more freedoms than girls. Lower levels of independent mobility have also been correlated with high traffic areas. It is likely that the levels of independent mobility change with the receipt of a drivers license. Teenagers have shown a desire to engage in work activity in order to afford their own automobile and a willingness to spend a large portion of their income for transportation (19). Because young drivers are involved in more accidents and account for a disproportionate share of highway fatalities (20), safety issues have dominated the research


5


on teenage travel and a large number of studies have been devoted to teenage involvement in vehicle crashes and injuries (21, 22, 23, 20, 24). Concerns about the high rate of crash involvement have contributed to adoption of graduated licensing programs in 44 states, which place restrictions on the driving privileges of teens (25). However, research shows that policies that delay licensure among teenagers have resulted in a reduction in the number of crashes for that age group (26, 27) but little empirical work exists on how teens have responded to these limitations on driving and how it impacts their overall mobility and activity participation. Recently, attention has turned to another aspect of children’s safety – the trip to school. The reduction in the number of children that walk to school, increasing congestion around schools, fears about crime and traffic safety, concerns about the decline in physical activity among children, and the lack of infrastructure for walking and biking have lead many communities to initiate “Safe Routes to School” programs (28). The increasing numbers of children who are driven to school illustrates their dependence upon others for their mobility (29, 30). The academic community is just starting to take notice of these programs and investigate their impacts on children’s travel. Other studies, while not specifically focused on transportation, contribute to our understanding of adolescent activities and culture. Evidence on childcare arrangements supports the notion that children gain more independence from their parents as they age. Over 40% of children aged 13 and 14 years engage in self-care (31). Children with parents employed full time and those living with a single father were more likely to take care of themselves. In addition to supporting the independence of older children, the findings from this study also indicate the prevalence of participation in organized after-school activities. Thirty-five percent of children of employed parents participated in an after-school activity during their parents’ work hours, the most popular childcare arrangement for that period of the day. Findings from other activity studies are consistent with these results. A time-use study conducted at the University of Michigan has shown an increase in the amount of time youth spend in structured activity participation outside of the home (32). Findings from the Survey of Income and Program Participation show that one-half of school-age children participate in sports, clubs, or after-school or weekend lessons (33). Household structure, employment, income and race shape children’s involvement in extracurricular activities. Participation rates were higher for non-Hispanic white children and those from households with married-couple families, employed parents, and higher incomes. One consequence of children spending more of their free time in organized activities rather than informal recreation or play may be that recreation may not occur locally and may extend to locations beyond the neighborhood. This increases the travel demand of youth and may result in greater chauffeuring responsibilities by parents and has important implications for those without access to transportation. This research review indicates that the degree of independent mobility among children is declining. However, there has been a lack of attention to the travel patterns of American teenagers. This paper aims to contribute to the knowledge of this area by examining the mobility patterns of American teenagers using a travel diary data set from a national sample. This data can identify patterns in teenagers’ travel and them to factors such as age, sex, household structure, and other soci-demographic factors. But this analysis limited


6


in its ability to identify other factors that contribute to the observed travel behaviors such as parental permissions, activity structures, and attitudes. DATA AND METHODS This paper employs data from the 1995 Nationwide Personal Transportation Survey (NPTS) to investigate the degree of independence in teenage travel. This travel diary survey collects information about individuals, households, and their trip-making behavior for an assigned travel day. Data were collected from 95,360 individuals in 42,033 households across the country. The data provide information about the trip including mode of travel, duration of travel, trip distance, number of people making the trip, time of day, and purpose. Sociodemographic information about the trip maker and his/her household is also provided. The trip-based data in the NPTS do not allow for detailed activity analysis; however, some information about activity participation may be inferred from the trip purpose information provided. For the purposes of this paper, teenagers were defined as those persons aged 13 to 18 years and numbered 8,568 in the data set. The teenagers in the NPTS made over 35,000 trips. Of these, after-school trips1 accounted for 12.4% of their total travel or 4,344 trips. The first trip made by these teenagers directly after-school was selected for study because they have the potential to reflect independent mobility more than any other time period. For one, regular school activities tend to be fixed in time and space and similar to work activities for adults. Students most likely travel to the same location at the same time and by the same mode of travel five days a week. These patterns are less variable than the patterns of more discretionary activities that take place after regular school hours. Two, demographic and employment trends show that the number of single-parent and two-worker households is growing (34). For this reason, it is likely that many teenagers are unsupervised during the after-school hours while their parents are at work. Therefore, travel by adolescents after school is of interest because it suggests the degree of independence that teens have in their mobility, mode of transport, and pursuit of activities. The choice to look at the first trip made directly after school does limit the conclusions that can be drawn from this analysis. For example, teens may engage in a variety of activities that may necessitate several trips. Examination of only the first trip in that sequence does not allow a composite picture to be drawn of the full range of after-school travel or the degree of independence in these travels. The inclusion of additional trips in the after-school sequence increases the complexity of the analysis and strengthens the conclusions that can be drawn and is recommended in future research. However, this simple analysis of the first trip is not without merit and provides a first glance of trip making of this understudied population. RESULTS This section will explore several dimensions of teenagers’ travel to their after-school activities. This descriptive analysis offers insight into the activity and transportation needs of teenagers and points to the degree of independence that they have in their daily travels.


7


Drivers License Acquiring a drivers license is a significant rite of passage for America’s teenagers and although having a licenses does not imply access to a vehicle or permission to drive it, it may be considered one indicator of the independence in travel, albeit imperfect. States vary in the minimum age required to obtain a permit and license; however, the majority of states require persons to be at least age 162 (35). As shown in Table 1, just over two-thirds (66.8%) of the teenagers over the age of 16 are licensed drivers. The proportion licensed increases with age; nearly three-fourths have their license by the age of 17. The proportion of teens aged 16 and over that possess a drivers license varies by geographic location. Youth that live in rural areas, suburban areas, or towns are much more likely to have a drivers license than those living in urban areas. Around one-third (33.4%) of age-eligible teenagers living in urban areas have a license compared to approximately threefourths of teenagers living elsewhere. This may be due to the increased transportation options available and accessibility in urban areas. Fears of crime and accidents in the more congested areas and the increased costs of owning a car may also deter many urban teens from obtaining a license. About one-half (50.8%) of the teenagers aged 16 and over are employed; however, over three-fourths (79.6%) of those that are working have a license. This reinforces the notion that the automobile is important mode as teens gain responsibilities and suggests that having a drivers license facilitates and may be necessary for employment. But the direction of that relationship cannot be discerned from these data. It is likely that teenagers seek employment to finance car ownership, as reported by Gurin (19).

After-school Trip Purpose The purpose of the trip made directly following the trip to school is shown in Table 2. The majority of teenagers (71.0%) return home after school; however, a significant portion of trips is for additional purposes. Trips for social and recreation purposes make up the majority (7.9%) of the after-school trips away from home. School-related (4.3%), personal business (3.8%), serve passenger (3.6%), dining out (3.3%), and shopping (3.0%) purposes together comprise a substantial share of trips. However, there is considerable variation when these trips are examined by age. As students age, there is a decline in the percentage of trips made directly home, as shown in Table 2. This implies that the tendency to engage in out-of-home activities after school increases with age and is suggestive of the increased independence and mobility that teenagers attain as they approach adulthood. Consistent with this notion, the portion of trips made for other purposes tends to increase with age, particularly trips for social/recreational, serve passenger, dining out, and shopping purposes. Personal business trips, dining out, and shopping trips reaches a peak percentage for teens aged seventeen and the portion of trips for social or recreational purposes peaks for sixteen year olds. As one might expect, the share of work and work-related trips made directly after school increases significantly after teenagers reach the age of 16. There is a slight decline in the percentage of trips for social/recreational, personal business, dining out, and shopping purposes among 18-year olds and appears to come with the addition of work responsibilities.


8


The portion of trips made to serve passengers increases with age. It is likely that for many teens, the serve passenger trip is one where they, too, are passengers. Parents may link the trip to pick up their teen after school with a trip to pick up other children, a spouse, or other family member. The analysis of only the first trip made directly after school and the trip-level orientation of the data limit our ability to make more assertive conclusions about the activity participation of teenagers. Those making a direct trip home after school may be making only in a brief stop on the way to out-of-home activities, stopping to change clothes, pick up sporting equipment, or to get a ride to the next activity. In fact, when those making a direct trip home are examined more closely, 44% of those trips were the final trip of the day for that teen; therefore, over half (56%) were followed by additional trips. One-quarter (25%) of those who made additional trips remained at home 35 minutes or less before departing again. These trips deserve a closer examination but are beyond the scope of this analysis.

Mode Table 3 shows the mode of travel for trip after school. The private automobile plays a significant role in after-school transport across all age groups; however, its prominence increases with the age of the teenager. For example, approximately one-third (33.2%) of the after-school trips made by 13-year olds were made by private automobile. But for 18-yearolds, the portion of trips by automobile is more than double (72.4%) that of 13-year- olds3. The automobile appears as the dominant mode at the time when the responsibilities that come with adulthood are combined with the license to drive. Of those teenagers who are licensed to drive, over half of them (54.9%) drove to their after-school activity. This reinforces the idea that once teens are given the license and means to drive, they will choose to drive over other modes. It also corresponds with teenagers’ increasing participation in out-of-home activities as they age and suggests that the ability to drive may enable such participation. Consistent with the increasing use of the automobile with age, there is a general decline in the use of other modes. The school bus is the principal mode of travel for thirteen and fourteen year-olds, comprising 47.3% and 41.6% of after-school trips respectively. The use of the school bus declines steadily with increasing age group and comprises less than 10% of the trips made by 17- and 18-year-olds. A similar decline across age groups can be observed in the share of trips made by walking. Thirteen-year olds make 14.2% of their after-school trips by walking, compared to only 9.0% for 18-year-olds. In addition to the increasing share of trips made by automobile, this disparity may be due to the differences in location between junior high schools and high schools. Because high schools tend to serve a larger population base than junior high schools, it would be logical to assume that they may not be located within walking distance for many students.

Travel Alone and With Others Traveling alone is another indicator of the degree of independence that teenagers have in their mobility. Table 4 shows the percentage of after-school trips in which teens traveled by themselves, unaccompanied by an adult, peer, or other person by age cohort.


9


The majority of trips made by adolescents are in the company of others, with only 37.6% made alone. For those that traveled with others, the average number of persons on a trip was 3.7. Household members accompanied 52.7% of those not traveling alone; nonhousehold members were present on 59.4% of the trips. In general, older students tend to make a larger share of their after school trips unaccompanied than younger students. For example, 62.3 % of the trips of the after school trips made by 18-year-olds were made alone, compared to only 34.3 percent of those made by 13-year-old teenagers. Because older teens tend to be more mature and are more likely to have an after-school job, the share of trip made alone is expected to be greater. In addition to the differences across age groups, there are differences between sexes. On average, male teenagers make more after-school trips alone than females, with 41.4% of male student traveling unaccompanied compared to 34.0% of female students. However, the gender differences in the share of trips made unaccompanied become less pronounced when comparing the older cohorts. What kinds of after-school activities are teenagers traveling to alone? Table 5 shows the after-school activities and the portions of unaccompanied trips for each trip purpose. The majority of trips to work and to school are solo ventures. But, trips made for the purpose of serving a passenger, shopping, receiving medical or dental care, socializing or recreating tend to be made with others. The majority of licensed teenagers (69.8%) who drove to their after-school destination did so alone. This is testament to the increasing license that older children have to travel alone and perhaps serves as an indicator that the parental concerns are based more upon fears of crime and personal safety than that upon concerns about traffic accidents. There is variation in the amount of after-school travel made alone by the type of household structure. In general, teenagers living in single-parent households are more likely to make a trip alone after school (40.8%) than those living in households with two adults (36.5%). This suggests that the time constraints of single parents do not allow for as much chauffeuring of children. It also suggests that these teens may have added responsibilities at home or work.

Travel Distance and Duration The travel distances and durations for the after-school trip are shown in Table 6 by age and mode of travel. Travel distances can show the spatial extent of travel and therefore, can serve as an indicator of independence for teenagers. Because the trip examined does not originate from home, the trip distances show the range of travel that teenagers have from their schools. Interestingly, those that travel by private automobile have a shorter average travel distance than those that travel by other motorized modes. Automobile trips average 5.1 miles for the after-school trip compared to 7.2 miles for trips by school bus and 11.2 miles for trips by public transit. Trip distance for the after school trip generally increases with age and serves as another indicator of the increasing independence that teens gain as they become older. But as stated earlier, high schools tend to have larger spatial service areas than junior high schools and the increasing trip distance may merely illustrate the longer trip home for these students. Although the travel distance increases with age, the travel durations tend to decline. An analysis of the travel time by mode by age shows this disparity between travel distance and time is most likely due to the increasing use of the automobile for trip making with age.


10


It also is interesting to note that those that travel alone tend to travel farther. Persons traveling alone after school average 5.7 mile and 18.2 minutes for the after-school trip, compared to 4.4 miles and 14.2 minutes for those traveling with others. This agrees with the data showing that older students are more likely to travel alone and more likely to travel farther distance. Trips to after-school jobs make up a significant portion of travel undertaken alone and it is reasonable to assume that work locations may be distant from school locations. On average, teenagers who return directly home after school travel shorter distance, yet take longer time (4.9 miles and 17.0 minutes compared to 5.4 miles and 13.9 minutes). This is also consistent with the earlier findings. Younger teens are more likely to go directly home after school and more likely to travel by slower modes -- such as transit, school bus or walking-- than older teens. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS This description of teenage travel after school demonstrates that older teenagers gain independence in their daily travels. However, this independence comes with increased reliance upon the automobile. By late adolescence, the automobile is well established in daily life as evidenced by the mode split for the after-school trip. Further evidence to support the importance of the automobile for teenagers comes from the high rate of licensure. Having the license to drive is not the only determinant of mode choice for these teenagers; however, it is probably symbolic of adulthood and freedom for those who possess it. Despite the rapid adoptions of automobile travel, younger teens are using alternative modes at a much higher rate than older teens, if only for the trip home from school. Increasing choices in travel mode may result in greater independence in travel, activity participation, and range of travel. However, it is not clear from the data whether the teens traveling by school bus, public transport or walking actually have choices in the destinations that they can reach by these modes since many go home after school. From a transportation planning perspective these findings offer little hope for increasing the use of alternate modes. Teenagers appear to abandon walking and transit use as soon as the automobile becomes an option. However, the graduated license programs initiated by many states will have an impact on teenagers’ ability to drive. Whether they slow automobile use, however, is another question. These programs are becoming more popular and their impact on traffic safety and travel behavior deserves more study and consideration. From this analysis, we see that out-of-home activity participation increases with age and older teens make fewer trips directly home after school. As stated earlier, many are making only brief stops at home before making another trip but the purpose of the stop at home is not clear. Nonetheless, most teens are going home after school. One issue for further exploration is the constraints on activities and travel by younger adolescents. For example, the majority of teens return directly home after school. Are they returning home because they lack adequate means of transport? Or are other concerns driving this decision, such as fears of crime, household responsibilities, or lack of social and recreational opportunities? Another issue that deserves a closer look is the differences between teenagers living in different environments. In this paper, we see that the licensure rates between urban and non-urban dwellers are significantly different. How does that translate into travel behavior? A comparison of the travel behaviors of teenagers in different environments merits exploration.


11


Finally, how do teenagers’ experiences with transportation and independence influence their travel behavior as they age? A panel data set such as the Puget Sound Regional Council Panel Data offers potential to explore these questions in more depth and offers the ability to look at teenagers’ travel behavior before and after obtaining the license to drive.


12


1

2

In the trip to school category, the NPTS does not distinguish between high school and college.

The 1995 NPTS sample was drawn from 33 states. All except Mississippi have a minimum age of 16 for the

drivers license.

3

One interesting note is the peak share of auto trips made by 17-year-olds. The decline in the share of

automobile among 18-year-olds (and the subsequent increase in the share of trips by school bus, transit, and walking) may be attributed to the fact that some of these 18-year-olds may have moved out of their parents’ home and have less access to an automobile than those living with their parents.


13


REFERENCES

Federal Highway Administration. Our Nation’s Travel: 1995 NPTS Early Results Report. Washington, DC: Federal Highway Administration, US Department of Transportation, 1997. 2. Williams, A.F., DF Preusser, AK Lund, and SJ Rasmussen. Cars Owned And Driven By Teenagers. Transportation Quarterly, Vol. 41, 1987, pp.177-88. 3. Massie, D.L., K.L. Campbell, and A.F. Williams. Traffic Accident Involvement Rates by Driver Age and Gender. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 27, 1995, pp. 73-87. 4. Mayhew, D.R. and H.M Simpson. New to the Road: Prevention Measures for Young Drivers or Novice Drivers. The Traffic Injury Research Foundation of Canada, Ottawa, Canada, 1991. 5. Gustavson, Sandra G. and James S. Trieschmann. Demographic Changes And Private Passenger Automobile Insurance In The 21st Century. CPCU Journal, Vol. 50, No.1, 1997, pp. 37-46. 6. Bhat, C.R. A Model Of Post-Home Arrival Activity Participation Behavior. Transportation Research, Vol. 32B, 1998, pp. 387-400. 7. Damm, D., and S.R. Lerman. A Theory Of Activity Scheduling Behavior. Environment and Planning, Vol. 13A, 1981, pp. 703-718. 8. Kitamura, R., and M. Kermanshah. Identifying Time And History Dependencies Of Activity Choice. In Transportation Research Record 944, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 1983, pp. 22-30. 9. Niemeier, D.A., and J.G. Morita. Duration Of Trip-Making Activities By Men And Women: A Survival Analysis. Transportation, Vol. 23, 1996, pp. 353-371. 10. Hanson, Susan and Geraldine Pratt. Gender, Work, And Space. Routledge, London, 1995. 11. Madden, Janice E. Why Women Work Closer To Home. Urban Studies, Vol. 18, No. 2, 1981, pp. 181-194. 12. Rosenbloom, Sandra. The Impact Of Growing Children On Their Parents’ Travel Behavior: A Comparative Analysis. In Transportation Research Record 1135, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 1987, pp. 17-25. 13. Singell, Larry D. and Jane H. Lilleydahl. An Empirical Analysis Of The Commute To Work Patterns Of Males And Females In Two-Earner Households. Urban Studies, Vol. 23, No.2, 1986, pp. 119-129. 14. Hillman, Mayer, Irwin Henderson, and Anne Whalley. Unfreedom Road. New Society, Vol. 23, No. 3, 1973, pp. 234-236. 15. Gurin, D.B. Travel Patterns of Suburban High School Males and Programs to Increase Their Mobility. Transportation Research Record 508, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 1974, pp. 1-12. 16. Van Vliet, Willem. Children’s Travel Behavior. Ekistics, Vol. 50, No. 298, 1983, pp. 61-65. 17. Hillman, Mayer, John Adams, and John Whitelegg. One False Move: A Study Of Children’s Independent Mobility. Policy Studies Institute, London, 1990. 1.



18. Tranter, Paul and Eric Pawson. Children’s Access To Local Environments: A

Case Study Of Christchurch, New Zealand. Local Environment, Vol. 6, No. 1, 2001, pp. 27-48. 19. Gurin, D.B. Economics of Car Ownership and Use by Teenagers. Transportation Research Record 583, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 1976, pp. 78-83. 20. Preusser, David F., William A. Leaf, Susan A. Ferguson, and Allan F. Williams. Variations In Teenage Activities With And Without A Drivers License. Journal of Public Health Policy, Vo. 21, No. 2, 2000, pp. 224-239. 21. Bloomfield, GJ. Teenagers’ Views Son Issues Related To Traffic Safety, Education And The Licensing Of Teenage Drivers. Journal of Traffic Safety Education, Vol. 31, No. 4, 1984, pp. 23-24. 22. Doherty, S.T., JC Andrey, and C. MacGregor. The Situational Risks Of Young Drivers: The Influence Of Passengers, Time Of Day And Day Of Week On Accident Rates. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 30, 1989, pp. 45-52. 23. Karpf, RS and AF Williams. Teenage Drivers And Motor Vehicle Deaths. Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 15, 1983, pp. 55-63. 24. Ulmer, RG, AF Williams, DF Preusser. Crash Involvement Of 16-Year Old Drivers. Journal of Safety Research, Vol. 28, No. 2, 1997, pp. 97-103. 25. American Automobile Association. Graduated Drivers Licensing. 2001. http://www.aaa.com. Accessed: October 10, 2001. 26. Ulmer, Robert G, David F. Preusser, Susan A. Ferguson, and Allan F. Williams. Teenage Crash Reduction Associated with Delayed Licensure in Louisiana. Journal of Safety Research, Vol. 30, No 1, 1999, pp. 31-38. 27. Ulmer, Robert G, Susan A. Ferguson, Allan F. Williams, and David F. Preusser. Teenage Crash Reduction Associated with Delayed Licensure in Connecticut, Journal of Safety Research, Vol. 32, No 1, 2001, pp. 31-41. 28. Walk to School Day – October 2, 2001. Morbidity & Mortality Weekly Report, Vol. 50, No. 38, Sept. 28, 2001, p. 831. 29. Gattis, James L., W. Alan Nicewander, and Larry E. Toothaker. Estimating

Parking Accumulation Demands At Elementary Schools, ITE Journal, Vol. 65, No. 10, 1995, pp. 45-49. 30. Templin, Neal. Caution: School Zone Is A Bumper-To-Bumper Jam. Wall Street Journal, November 22, Vol. 234, No. 101, 1999, pp. B1. 31. Smith, Kristin. Who’s Minding The Kids? Child Care Arrangements. Current Population Reports, P70-70, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC, 2000, http://www.census.gov/prod/2000pubs/p70-70.pdf. Accessed: October 10, 2001. 32. Hofferth, Sandra L. and John F. Sandberg. Changes In American Children’s Time 1981-1997. Research report. Population Studies Center, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, 2000. 33. Fields, Jason, Kristin Smith, Loretta E. Bass, and Terry Lugaila. A Child’s Day: Home, School, And Play (Selected Indicators Of Child Well-Being). Current Population Reports, P70-68, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC, 2001, http://www.census.gov/prod/2001pubs/p70-68.pdf. Accessed: October 10, 2001. 34. Bryson, Ken. Household And Family Characteristics: March 1995. Current Population Reports, P20-488, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, DC, 1996, http://www.census.gov/prod/2/pop/p20/p20-488.pdf. Accessed: October 10, 2001.


15


35. US Department of Transportation. Highway Statistics. Office of Highway Policy

Information, Federal Highway Administration, US Department of Transportation, Washington, DC, 1999, http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/hs99/index.htm. Accessed: October 14, 2001.


16


LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 1 Drivers License Status For Teenagers Aged 16 And Higher TABLE 2 Purposes Of After-School Trips By Age Group TABLE 3 Mode Of Travel For After School Trips By Age Group TABLE 4 Travel Alone After School By Age And Sex TABLE 5 Percentage Of Trips Made Alone By Trip Purpose TABLE 6 Travel Time and Distance by Mode and Age


17


TABLE 1 Drivers License Status For Teenagers Aged 16 And Higher

Age 16 17 18 Urban status Urban Rural Suburban Town Work status Worker Not working Total Source: 1995 NPTS

Drivers License Yes 48.8 % 73.1 77.7

No 51.2 % 26.9 22.3

34.4 76.3 72.0 74.6

65.6 23.7 28.0 25.4

79.6 54.0 66.8 %

20.4 46.0 33.2 %


18


TABLE 2 Purposes Of After-School Trips By Age Group

Trip Purpose

13

14

15

Home Social/recreational School Personal business Serve/pick up passenger Out to eat Shopping Work/work related Medical/dental Source: 1995 NPTS

80.2 % 3.6 6.4 3.1 1.7 0.8 1.0 0.3 0.3

74.8 % 5.7 7.0 4.7 1.5 1.5 2.1 0.1 0.8

76.0 % 6.9 3.1 3.7 2.2 3.9 2.7 0.6 0.4


Age in years 16 17 67.1 % 10.6 2.5 2.7 4.7 4.1 3.6 2.4 1.2

58.5 % 9.8 2.6 5.1 6.1 7.5 5.4 4.3 0.7

18 66.7 % 7.6 3.5 3.8 6.4 2.4 3.3 5.5 0.0

All ages 71.0 % 7.9 4.3 3.8 3.6 3.3 3.0 2.0 0.6

19


TABLE 3 Mode Of Travel For After School Trips By Age Group

Mode 13 POV 33.2 % School Bus 47.3 Transit 4.1 Walk 14.2 Bicyle 1.3 Source: 1995 NPTS


14 38.9 % 41.6 5.0 12.8 1.7

15 46.6 % 31.7 5.1 14.5 1.7

Age in years 16 62.1 % 22.3 4.4 10.5 0.2

17 79.8 % 7.8 5.0 7.2 0.0

18 72.4 % 9.5 8.0 9.0 0.2

All ages 54.4 % 27.8 5.1 11.5 0.9

20


TABLE 4 Travel Alone After School By Age And Sex Male Age 13 38.3 % 14 38.7 15 31.4 16 38.1 17 40.4 18 63.8 Total 41.2 % Source: 1995 NPTS

Female


Total 29.9 % 20.1 27.1 32.3 41.5 60.8 34.0 %

34.3 % 28.6 29.0 35.2 40.9 62.3 37.6 %

21


TABLE 5 Percentage Of Trips Made Alone By Trip Purpose Trip Purpose Home Social/recreational School Personal business Serve/pick up passenger Out to eat Shopping Work/work related Medical/dental Total Source: 1995 NPTS


Percentage of trips 39.6 % 32.8 52.7 39.1 17.1 9.0 21.0 60.1 28.7 37.6

22


TABLE 6 Travel time and distance by mode and age Automobile

Age

trip distance (miles)

travel time (min)

13 Mean N 14 Mean N 15 Mean N 16 Mean N 17 Mean N 18 Mean N

3.7 233 4.7 261 5.2 309 4.7 418 5.4 507 6.5 338

8.9 231 10.3 264 11.3 312 11.0 425 11.6 509 12.4 345

Total Mean N

5.1 2066

11.1 2086

Bicycle trip distance (miles) 1.8 11 1.5 11 1.4 8 2.8 3 -

School Bus

travel time (min)


travel time (min)

Public Transit trip distance (miles)

travel time (min)

Walking trip distance (miles)

Total

travel time (min)


travel time (min)

3.9 4

14.2 11 10.8 12 14.4 8 14.0 4 24.3 4

6.4 388 6.4 313 6.9 247 8.2 185 11.0 98 8.8 42

23.6 392 23.8 333 22.6 261 23.8 191 25.7 103 30.5 45

32.5 25 10.4 30 6.7 31 6.2 28 6.8 28 7.5 29

57.9 29 31.5 31 26.9 38 35.3 33 33.4 33 39.1 30

0.7 103 0.7 93 1.1 83 1.0 71 0.8 50 0.7 47

13.7 100 13.5 92 16.5 80 14.7 69 13.7 47 12.5 43

5.4 796 4.9 744 5.2 711 5.2 736 5.7 712 5.9 477

18.7 800 17.5 767 16.7 734 15.7 754 14.7 721 15.7 487

1.9 37

14.2 39

7.2 1273

23.9 1325

11.2 171

36.7 194

0.8 447

14.2 431

5.4 4176

16.6 4263

-

Source: 1995 NPTS


23
