Selecting the traffic mode: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 13:27, 31 May 2006

30.5.2006

Argumentation analysis on public transportation

Supporting (+) or contradicting (-) sign appointed to each sub argument is defined in relation to the argument directly above.

Statement: Public transportation is a favorable choice to the passenger

← + Use of professional drivers enhances traffic safety

← + A familiar and reliable mode of transportation

← + “Anonymous” mode of traveling

← + Seen as a part of the urban culture

← + “Willingness to be driven”

← - Ticket fare

← - No maintenance or operating costs associated with a personal car

← + Ticket fares are relatively high to those who use public transportation only occasionally

← - Time expenditure (stops, interchanges)

← - No time needed for parking

← - Some other activities can be undertaken while traveling

← - Inflexibility

← - Public transportation in the Helsinki metropolitan area is rather well organised and easily available (routes, timetables)

← - Cross traffic is somewhat problematic

← - Public transportation is often seen as a low-status mode of transportation compared to a personal car

← - Environmental values are continuously gaining wider acceptance

← - Public transportation is an inconvenient mode of traveling for shopping or transporting goods

← - Traffic noise and emissions lower the quality and attractiveness of the environment

← - Increasing the proportion of public transportation to personal cars decreases traffic flow and, therefore, the adverse effects originating from it

Statement: Public transportation is a favorable choice to the society

← + Using public transportation promotes better planning of the daily traveling activities and reduces unnecessary trips

← + New regulations and technical improvements are more easily implemented in public transportation vehicles

← + Public transportation is available to all, which improves social equality

← - Ticket fares are too high for some people

← + Society can support the disadvantaged with subsidies

← + The need of parking areas is reduced, and the land can submitted to a more profitable use

← + Higher utilisation rate increases the benefits arising from the use of public transportation

← - Traffic emissions cause adverse environmental and health effects (particulate matter, CO2)

← - Relatively low emissions compared to the use of personal cars

← - Maintenance and operating costs

← + Societal subsidies

← - Societal cost from the traffic accidents

← - Reducing traffic flow and the use of professional drivers decreases the risk of accidents

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
-Argumenttianalyysiä joukkoliikenteestä
+Argumentation analysis on public transportation
-Ala-argumentin puoltava (+) tai vastustava (-) etumerkki aina suhteessa välittömästi ylempänä esitettyyn argumenttiin.
+Supporting (+) or contradicting (-) sign appointed to each sub argument is defined in relation to the argument directly above.
-Väite: Joukkoliikenne on yksilön kannalta edullinen vaihtoehto
+Statement: Public transportation is a favorable choice to the passenger
-:&larr; + ammattiliikennöitsijöiden käyttö lisää liikenneturvallisuutta
-:&larr; + tuttuus, varma valinta
-:&larr; + ”anonyymi matkustusmuoto”
-:&larr; + osa kaupunkikulttuuria
-:&larr; + ”willingness to be driven”
+:&larr; + Use of professional drivers enhances traffic safety
+:&larr; + A familiar and reliable mode of transportation
+:&larr; + “Anonymous” mode of traveling
+:&larr; + Seen as a part of the urban culture
+:&larr; + “Willingness to be driven”
-:&larr; - lipun hinta
-::&larr; - ei henkilöauton käyttö- tai ylläpitokustannuksia
-::&larr; + suhteellisen kalliit liput vähän matkustettaessa
-:&larr; - aikaviive (pysähdykset, vaihdot)
-::&larr; - ei pysäköintiä
-::&larr; - liikkumiseen käytettävänä aikana voi puuhastella muita juttuja
-:&larr; - joustamattomuus
-::&larr; - suurkaupungissa reittien ja aikataulujen kattavuus on kohtuullisen hyvä
-:::&larr; - erityisesti poikittaisliikenne on pääkaupunkiseudulla heikosti järjestetty
-:&larr; - joukkoliikenteen alhaisempi sosiaalinen ja statuksellinen arvo suhteessa henkilöautoiluun
-::&larr; - ekohenkisten ja yhteisöllisten arvojen merkitys kasvussa
-:&larr; - ostosmatkat ja tavarakuljetukset hankala toteuttaa
-:&larr; - liikenteen melu ja päästöt laskevat kaupunkiympäristön viihtyisyyttä
-::&larr; - joukkoliikenteen suhteellisen osuuden kasvu parantaa viihtyisyyttä
+:&larr; - Ticket fare
+::&larr; - No maintenance or operating costs associated with a personal car
+::&larr; + Ticket fares are relatively high to those who use public transportation only	occasionally
+:&larr; - Time expenditure (stops, interchanges)
+::&larr; - No time needed for parking
+::&larr; - Some other activities can be undertaken while traveling
+:&larr; - Inflexibility
+::&larr; - Public transportation in the Helsinki metropolitan area is rather well organised and easily available (routes, timetables)
+:::&larr; - Cross traffic is somewhat problematic
+:&larr; - Public transportation is often seen as a low-status mode of transportation compared to a personal car
+::&larr; - Environmental values are continuously gaining wider acceptance
+:&larr; - Public transportation is an inconvenient mode of traveling for shopping or transporting goods
+:&larr; - Traffic noise and emissions lower the quality and attractiveness of the environment
+::&larr; - Increasing the proportion of public transportation to personal cars decreases traffic flow and, therefore, the adverse effects originating from it
-Väite: Joukkoliikenne on yhteiskunnan kannalta edullinen vaihtoehto
+Statement: Public transportation is a favorable choice to the society
-:&larr; + joukkoliikenteen käyttö edistää liikkumisen suunnitelmallisuutta ja vähentää 	ns. ”turhia matkoja”
-:&larr; + julkinen autokanta helpommin uudistettavissa ja kehitettävissä
-:&larr; + joukkoliikenne kaikkien saatavilla (sosiaaliset edut)
-::&larr; - liput joillekin turhan kalliita
-::&larr; + vähempiosaisten liikkumista voidaan tukea yhteiskunnallisesti
-:&larr; + paikoitusalueiden vapautuminen muuhun käyttöön
-:&larr; + suuri käyttöaste kasvattaa suhteellisia hyötyjä
-:&larr; - liikenteen ympäristövaikutukset (pienhiukkaset, CO2)
+:&larr; + Using public transportation promotes better planning of the daily traveling activities and reduces unnecessary trips
-::&larr; - pienemmät päästöt suhteessa henkilöautoliikenteeseen
+:&larr; + New regulations and technical improvements are more easily implemented in public transportation vehicles
-:&larr; - käyttö- ja ylläpitokustannukset
+:&larr; + Public transportation is available to all, which improves social equality
-::&larr; + yhteiskunnan tukiaiset
+::&larr; - Ticket fares are too high for some people
-:&larr; - liikenneonnettomuuksien yhteiskunnalliset kustannukset
+::&larr; + Society can support the disadvantaged with subsidies
-::&larr; - liikennetiheyden lasku ja ammattiliikennöitsijöiden käyttö pienentää		 liikenneonnettomuuksien riskiä
+:&larr; + The need of parking areas is reduced, and the land can submitted to a more profitable use
+:&larr; + Higher utilisation rate increases the benefits arising from the use of public transportation
+:&larr; - Traffic emissions cause adverse environmental and health effects (particulate matter, CO2)
+::&larr; - Relatively low emissions compared to the use of personal cars
+:&larr; - Maintenance and operating costs
+::&larr; + Societal subsidies
+:&larr; - Societal cost from the traffic accidents
+::&larr; - Reducing traffic flow and the use of professional drivers decreases the risk of 	accidents

Selecting the traffic mode: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 13:27, 31 May 2006

Navigation menu