Time slot choice analysis for Demand-Responsive Transport service: evidence from Ragusa province, Italy

Tiziana Campisi; Antonio  Russo; Chiara Spadaro; Giovanni Tesoriere; Guilhermina  Torrao

doi:10.61089/aot2025.6z4q4726

Authors

Tiziana Campisi Department of Engineering and Architecture, University of Enna Kore, Enna (EN), Italy Author https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4251-4838
Antonio Russo Department of Engineering and Architecture, University of Enna Kore, Enna (EN), Italy Author https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4657-3085
Chiara Spadaro Department of Engineering and Architecture, University of Enna Kore, Enna (EN), Italy Author https://orcid.org/0009-0004-4277-8176
Giovanni Tesoriere Department of Engineering and Architecture, University of Enna Kore, Enna (EN), Italy Author https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5201-9887
Guilhermina Torrao Department of Engineering Management, Aston University, Birmingham, United Kingdom Author https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5614-2209

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.61089/aot2025.6z4q4726

Keywords:

flexible and complementary mobility, DRT time slot, random utility model, binomial logit model, Ragusa case study

Abstract

The transition to sustainable mobility requires the implementation of strategies that make the sector more environmentally friendly and efficient. In recent years, we have witnessed a transition phase, i.e. the implementation of policies and actions that reduce the use of private vehicles (especially those with combustion engines) and promote greener modes of transport such as public transport, cycling, walking and innovative, climate-friendly mobility solutions. It is therefore possible to implement a series of improvement measures and strategies (e.g. innovative tariffs, service quality, complementary services and greater efficiency, as well as the transition to green fleets). It is also essential to implement complementary transport services such as on-demand or shared. This research study analyses connections in the province of Ragusa—where a Demand Responsive Transport service (DRTs) operates—using a hub and spoke model to discretise travel patterns. This research analyses the aspects related to the time slots in which the service is used using a modelling linked to the Random Utility Models (RUMs) and through the definition of a binomial logit model (BNL). The choice of RUM enables identifying relationship between the chosen alternative and the individual decision. The calibrated model reveals that the most influential attribute in the choice of the time slot, for the service analysed, is the area of origin. This highlights how users choose the time slot mainly based on the area of origin, which, given the characteristics of the service, corresponds to the direction of travel; among other attributes tested, the availability of buses was found to be significant. The results are meaningful for improving the existing services and for defining a complementary service of local public transport and on-demand services. Furthermore, the proposed framework can be extended to other aspects of the decision process involved in DRT adoption.

References

1. Alonso-González, M. J., Hoogendoorn-Lanser, S., van Oort, N., Cats, O., & Hoogendoorn, S. (2020). Drivers and barriers in adopting Mobility as a Service (MaaS)–A latent class cluster analysis of attitudes. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 132, 378-401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2019.11.022

2. Annunziata, A., Desogus, G., Mighela, F., & Garau, C. (2022, July). Health and mobility in the post-pandemic scenario. An analysis of the adaptation of sustainable urban mobility plans in key contexts of Italy. In International conference on computational science and its applications (pp. 439-456). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

3. Ast Sicilia. http://www.astsicilia.it/

4. Baier, M. J., Sörensen, L., & Schlüter, J. C. (2024). How successful is my DRT system? A review of different parameters to consider when developing flexible public transport systems. Transport Policy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2024.09.006

5. Barakat, S., Osman, A. I., Tag-Eldin, E., Telba, A. A., Mageed, H. M. A., & Samy, M. M. (2024). Achieving green mobility: Multi-objective optimization for sustainable electric vehicle charging. Energy Strategy Reviews, 53, 101351.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2024.101351

6. Bellini, C., Dellepiane, G., & Quaglierini, C. (2003). The demand responsive transport services: Italian approach. WIT Transactions on The Built Environment, 64.

7. Ben-Akiva, M. E., & Lerman, S. R. (1985). Discrete choice analysis: theory and application to travel demand (Vol. 9). MIT press.

8. Ben-Akiva, M., McFadden, D., & Train, K. (2019). Foundations of stated preference elicitation: Consumer behavior and choice-based conjoint analysis. Foundations and Trends® in Econometrics, 10(1-2), 1-144.

9. Bérczi, K., Jüttner, A., Laumanns, M., & Szabó, J. (2017). Stochastic route planning in public transport. Transportation Research Procedia, 27, 1080-1087. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2017.12.096

10. Campisi, T., Canale, A., Tesoriere, G., Ali, N., Ignaccolo, M., & Cocuzza, E. (2022, July). An analysis of the integration of DRT services with local public transport in post-pandemic period: some of the preliminary insights in the Italian context. In International Conference on Computational Science and Its Applications (pp. 496-508). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

11. Campisi, T., Garau, C., Acampa, G., Maltinti, F., Canale, A., & Coni, M. (2021, September). Developing flexible mobility on-demand in the era of mobility as a service: an overview of the Italian context before and after pandemic. In International Conference on Computational Science and Its Applications (pp. 323-338). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

12. Campisi, T., Basbas, S., Tesoriere, G., Trouva, M., Papas, T., & Mrak, I. (2020). How to create walking friendly cities. A multi-criteria analysis of the central open market area of Rijeka. Sustainability, 12(22), 9470. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12229470

13. Caramuta, C., Grosso, A., Longo, G., Ricchetti, C., & Rotaris, L. (2025). Design, implementation and monitoring of a Demand Responsive Transport service for student leisure transfers: The case study of University of Trieste. Transportation Engineering, 100345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.treng.2025.100345

14. Cascetta, E. (2013). Transportation Systems Engineering: Theory and Methods (Vol. 49). Springer Science & Business Media.

15. Cascetta, E., & Nguyen, S. (1988). A unified framework for estimating or updating origin/destination matrices from traffic counts. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 22(6), 437-455.

16. Cattivelli, V. (2021). Planning peri-urban areas at regional level: The experience of Lombardy and Emilia-Romagna (Italy). Land use policy, 103, 105282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105282

17. Cebecauer, M., Burghout, W., Jenelius, E., Babicheva, T., & Leffler, D. (2021). Integrating demand responsive services into public transport disruption management. IEEE Open Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2, 24-36.

18. Cede, A. (2002). Public transport timetabling and vehicle scheduling. In Advanced modeling for transit operations and service planning (pp. 30-57). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/9780585475226-002

19. Chng, S. (2021). Advancing behavioural theories in sustainable mobility: a research agenda. Urban Science, 5(2), 43. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci5020043

20. Croissant, Y. (2012). Estimation of multinomial logit models in R: The mlogit Packages. R package version 0.2-2. URL: http://cran. r-project. org/web/packages/mlogit/vignettes/mlogit. pdf.

21. Croissant, Y. (2020). Estimation of random utility models in R: the mlogit package. Journal of Statistical Software, 95, 1-41. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v095.i11

22. Croissant, Y. (2020). Package ‘mlogit’. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v095.i11

23. Delponte, I., & Costa, V. (2022). Metropolitan MaaS and DRT Schemes: Are They Paving the Way Towards a More Inclusive and Resilient Urban Environment?. In Transforming our World through Universal Design for Human Development (pp. 304-311). IOS Press. 10.3233/SHTI220853

24. Dong, X., Chow, J. Y., Waller, S. T., & Rey, D. (2022). A chance-constrained dial-a-ride problem with utility-maximising demand and multiple pricing structures. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 158, 102601. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2021.102601

25. D'Orso, G., Yasir, M., & Migliore, M. (2025). Combining walkability assessments at different scales in measuring spatial inequalities in access to railway stations. Journal of Transport & Health, 44, 102081. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2025.102081

26. Eaa. https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/topics/in-depth/transport-and-mobility

27. El Mustapha, H., Ozkan, B., & Turetken, O. (2024). Acceptance of Mobility-as-a-Service: Insights from empirical studies on influential factors. Communications in Transportation Research, 4, 100119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.commtr.2024.100119

28. Etna Trasporti. https://www.etnatrasporti.it/

29. Franco, P., Johnston, R., & McCormick, E. (2020). Demand responsive transport: Generation of activity patterns from mobile phone network data to support the operation of new mobility services. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 131, 244-266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2019.09.038

30. Garau, C., Annunziata, A., & Yamu, C. (2024). A walkability assessment tool coupling multi-criteria analysis and space syntax: the case study of Iglesias, Italy. European Planning Studies, 32(2), 211-233. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2020.1761947

31. Gkiotsalitis, K. (2023). Strategic Planning of Public Transport Services. In Public Transport Optimization (pp. 377-434). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

32. Gottero, E., Larcher, F., & Cassatella, C. (2023). Defining and regulating peri-urban areas through a landscape planning approach: The case study of Turin Metropolitan Area (Italy). Land, 12(1), 217. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12010217

33. He, Y., Liu, Z., & Song, Z. (2022). Integrated charging infrastructure planning and charging scheduling for battery electric bus systems. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 111, 103437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2022.103437

34. Ho, C. Q., & Tirachini, A. (2024). Mobility-as-a-Service and the role of multimodality in the sustainability of urban mobility in developing and developed countries. Transport Policy, 145, 161-176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2023.10.013

35. Hussain, A., Liu, K., & Ullah, I. (2023). Willingness to use demand responsive transit: a case study of Karachi city. Advances in Transportation Studies, 60.

36. Jevinger, Å., & Svensson, H. (2024). Stated opinions and potential travel with DRT–a survey covering three different age groups. Transportation Planning and Technology, 47(7), 968-995. https://doi.org/10.1080/03081060.2024.2337059

37. Kercuku, A., Curci, F., Lanzani, A., & Zanfi, F. (2023). Italia di mezzo: The emerging marginality of intermediate territories between metropolises and inner areas. Region, 10(1), 89-112. https://doi.org/10.18335/region.v10i1.397KICIŃSKI, M. M., & Solecka, K. (2018). Application of MCDA/MCDM methods for an integrated urban public transportation system–case study, city of Cracow. Archives of Transport, 46(2), 71-84. https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0012.2107

38. Kim, J. (2020). Assessment of the DRT system based on an optimal routing strategy. Sustainability, 12(2), 714. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12020714

39. Kim, T. W., Chae, M., & Yu, J. W. (2025). Optimization and Implementation Framework for Connected Demand Responsive Transit (DRT) Considering Punctuality. Sustainability (2071-1050), 17(3). 10.3390/su17031079

40. König, A., & Grippenkoven, J. (2020). The actual demand behind demand-responsive transport: Assessing behavioral intention to use DRT systems in two rural areas in Germany. Case Studies on Transport Policy, 8(3), 954-962.

41. Kramarz, M., & Przybylska, E. (2021). Multimodal transport in the context of sustainable development of a city. Sustainability, 13(4), 2239. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13042239

42. Kuziev, A., Juraev, M., Yusufkhonov, Z., & Akhmedov, D. (2023, March). Application of multimodal transportation in the development of future flows of the region. In AIP Conference Proceedings (Vol. 2612, No. 1). AIP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0134950

43. Lättman, K., & Otsuka, N. (2024). Sustainable development of urban mobility through active travel and public transport. Sustainability, 16(2), 534. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16020534

44. Li, Y., & Voege, T. (2017). Mobility as a service (MaaS): Challenges of implementation and policy required. Journal of transportation technologies, 7(2), 95-106. https://doi.org/10.4236/jtts.2017.72007

45. Lin, G., Wang, S., Lin, C., Bu, L., & Xu, H. (2021). Evaluating performance of public transport networks by using public transport criteria matrix analytic hierarchy process models—Case study of Stonnington, Bayswater, and Cockburn public transport network. Sustainability, 13(12), 6949. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13126949

46. Logan, P. (2007). Best practice demand-responsive transport (DRT) policy. Road & Transport Research: A Journal of Australian and New Zealand Research and Practice, 16(2), 50-59.

47. Marzano, V., Papola, A., & Simonelli, F. (2009). Limits and perspectives of effective O–D matrix correction using traffic counts. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 17(2), 120-132.

48. McFadden, D. (1973). Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior.

49. Melo, S., Gomes, R., Abbasi, R., & Arantes, A. (2024). Demand-responsive transport for urban mobility: Integrating mobile data analytics to enhance public transportation systems. Sustainability, 16(11), 4367. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16114367

50. Meyer-Hollatz, T., Schwarz, N., & Werner, T. (2025, March). Punctuality Predictions in Public Transportation: Quantifying the Effect. In Solutions and Technologies for Responsible Digitalization: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Wirtschaftsinformatik, Paderborn, Germany, 2023, Vol. 2 (Vol. 75, p. 395). Springer Nature.

51. Microsoft Corporation. (2025). Microsoft Excel (Versione Office 365) [Software]. https://www.microsoft.com/it-it/microsoft-365?rtc=1

52. Muller, M., Park, S., Lee, R., Fusco, B., & Correia, G. H. D. A. (2021). Review of whole system simulation methodologies for assessing mobility as a service (Maas) as an enabler for sustainable urban mobility. Sustainability, 13(10), 5591. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13105591

53. OpenStreetMap. About OpenStreetMap (2025). https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/About_OpenStreetMap

54. Parbo, J., Nielsen, O. A., & Prato, C. G. (2014). User perspectives in public transport timetable optimisation. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 48, 269-284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2014.09.005

55. Park, J., Choi, S., Kim, G., & Jo, H. (2025). Provision of metropolitan demand responsive transit and attitude’s role in mode choice. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 140, 104640. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2025.104640

56. Pavanini, T. (2023). RURAL DEMAND RESPONSIVE TRANSPORT An overview of the Italian scenario and analysis of Antola-Tigullio inner area case study.

57. Pfoser, S. (2022). Developing user-centered measures to increase the share of multimodal freight transport. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 43, 100729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rtbm.2021.100729

58. QGIS.org. QGIS Geographic Information System. Open-Source Geospatial Foundation Project (2025). http://qgis.org

59. Qiao, S., & Yeh, A. G. O. (2023). Mobility-on-demand public transport toward spatial justice: Shared mobility or Mobility as a Service. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 123, 103916. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2023.103916

60. Rahmani, B., Moghaddam, A. M., & Maghrebi, M. (2025). Forecasting demand fluctuations of public bus transit during special events and adverse weather conditions through smart card data analysis. Travel Behaviour and Society, 40, 101033. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2025.101033

61. Rayaprolu, H., & Levinson, D. (2024). Transit modal complementarity: measuring the access provided by transfers. Transportation, 1-20.

62. R Core Team. (2025). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/

63. Ryley, T. J., Stanley, P. A., Enoch, M. P., Zanni, A. M., & Quddus, M. A. (2014). Investigating the contribution of Demand Responsive Transport to a sustainable local public transport system. Research in Transportation Economics, 48, 364-372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2014.09.064

64. Rodríguez-Rad, C. J., Revilla-Camacho, M. Á., & Sánchez-del-Río-Vázquez, M. E. (2023). Exploring the intention to adopt sustainable mobility modes of transport among young university students. International journal of environmental research and public health, 20(4), 3196. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20043196

65. Schasché, S. E., Sposato, R. G., & Hampl, N. (2022). The dilemma of demand-responsive transport services in rural areas: Conflicting expectations and weak user acceptance. Transport Policy, 126, 43-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2022.06.015

66. Solanki, V. S., & Agarwal, P. K. (2024). Identification of key performance indicators using hybrid COPRAS-TOPSIS for urban public transit systems by evaluating with AHP and FAHP. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 83(35), 82439-82469.

67. Sörensen, L., Bossert, A., Jokinen, J. P., & Schlüter, J. (2021). How much flexibility does rural public transport need?–Implications from a fully flexible DRT system. Transport Policy, 100, 5-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2020.09.005

68. Stopka, U., Pessier, R., & Günther, C. (2018). Mobility as a service (MaaS) based on intermodal electronic platforms in public transport. In Human-Computer Interaction. Interaction in Context: 20th International Conference, HCI International 2018, Las Vegas, NV, USA, July 15–20, 2018, Proceedings, Part II 20 (pp. 419-439). Springer International Publishing.

69. Sviridova, J. L., Budrina, E. V., Rogavichene, L. I., Lebedeva, A. S., & Rykova, I. S. (2025). Transport Environment of a Smart City: The Research of Alternative Approaches to Ensuring Punctuality of Terrestrial Urban Public Transport. In International Conference on Digital Transformation and Global Society (pp. 129-144). Springer, Cham.

70. Tejero-Beteta, C., Moyano, A., & Sánchez-Cambronero, S. (2024). Factors Influencing the Efficiency of Demand-Responsive Transport Services in Rural Areas: A GIS-Based Method for Optimising and Evaluating Potential Services. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 13(8), 275. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi13080275

71. Thao, V. T., Imhof, S., & von Arx, W. (2023). Demand responsive transport: New insights from peri-urban experiences. Travel Behaviour and Society, 31, 141-150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2022.11.012

72. Tordai, D., Lieszkovszky, J. P., & Munkácsy, A. (2024, April). Preferences of Rural Travelers Towards Demand Responsive Transport. In Transport Research Arena Conference (pp. 66-71). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland.

73. Tsigdinos, S., Karolemeas, C., Siti, M., Papadaki, K., Athanasopoulos, K., & Tzouras, P. G. (2024). Route Planning for Flexible Bus Services in Regional Cities and Rural Areas: Combining User Preferences with Spatial Analysis. Future Transportation, 4(4), 1476-1500. https://doi.org/10.3390/futuretransp4040071

74. Ureta, S. (2008). To move or not to move? Social exclusion, accessibility and daily mobility among the low‐income population in Santiago, Chile. Mobilities, 3(2), 269-289. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450100802095338

75. van der Vlugt, A. L., Lättman, K., Welsch, J., Prichard, E., Otsuka, N., & De Vos, J. (2025). Analysing the determinants of perceived walkability, and its effects on walking. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 197, 104498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2025.104498

76. Vasconcelos, A., Coelho, M. C., & Bandeira, J. M. (2025). A Case Study on Peri‐Urban Public Transport Optimisation From an Energy and Environmental Perspective. IET Intelligent Transport Systems, 19(1), e70035. https://doi.org/10.1049/itr2.70035

77. Walker, J. (2024). Human transit, revised edition: how clearer thinking about public transit can enrich our communities and our lives. Island Press.

78. Wang, S., Sun, Y., Musco, C., & Bao, Z. (2021, June). Public transport planning: When transit network connectivity meets commuting demand. In Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Management of Data (pp. 1906-1919). https://dl.acm.org/doi/proceedings/10.1145/3448016

79. Wang, H., Li, J., Wang, P., Teng, J., & Loo, B. P. (2023). Adaptability analysis methods of demand responsive transit: a review and future directions. Transport Reviews, 43(4), 676-697. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2023.2165574

80. Wang, C., Quddus, M., Enoch, M., Ryley, T., & Davison, L. (2015). Exploring the propensity to travel by demand responsive transport in the rural area of Lincolnshire in England. Case Studies on Transport Policy, 3(2), 129-136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2014.12.006

81. Xiao, M., Chen, L., Feng, H., Peng, Z., & Long, Q. (2024). Smart City Public Transportation Route Planning Based on Multi-objective Optimization: A Review. Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering, 31(6), 3351-3375.