Hello everyone. In this video, we will discuss the reasons that are causing the choice of means of transport in daily life. This video will introduce the theoretical aspects, it will be supplemented by another video given by my colleague Sebastian Monafo who will then present an example. Many research work is conducted on the choice of means of transport in daily life. This work shows three important things. The first of these things is that unlike to what one might think, the springs from the use of different means of transport are not confined to the comparison of travel time and prices. In many cases, we are faced with more complex logics. The second important thing that say such research, is that the provisions in respect of the use of different means of transport are very diverse in the population. There are very different reasons to use a means of transport over another or a combination of means of transport. The third important thing that emerges from the literature, from scientific work on the choice of means of transport, is that the provisions in respect of the use of different means of transport are segmented. It means we can identify groups of people who base their choice on different reasons. If now we go look at that in a bit more detail, we can say that there are three logics of action which are causing different modal choices, from a theoretical point of view. I propose now that we wane them one after the other. The first of these three logics of action is what might be called, with Max Weber, the instrumental action. Applied to the field of modal choice, it consists in comparing available alternatives of the various means of transport and choose either the fastest option, or the least expensive option, or a combination of these two parameters. So the idea here is that the choice is based on an individual interest based on minimizing the cost and minimizing the travel time. You're looking at the table coming from a research covering six cities: Bern, Besançon, Geneva, Grenoble, Lausanne and Toulouse and which aimed in particular to try to see how users are rational depending on the comparison of travel times when using different modes of transport. You see very clearly when looking at this line regarding the automotive, that when the car is faster to go to work than public transport, well, it is used. For example, in 70% of cases. This is what you see here. While public transport is faster, still regarding the case of Bern, you see that the car is only used in 17% of cases. You see also, still in this table, that in the other five cities studied, that is to say, Besançon, Geneva, Grenoble, Toulouse and Lausanne, there is also a relationship between the compared time and the means of transport chosen to work. But you see that this relationship is not exactly the same as in Berne. When the car is faster to go to work, it is still used by 52% of respondents in these agglomerations and when the car is faster, it is actually used in 84% of cases. What basically shows these results is that users are rational in terms of travel time but that rational approach based on the travel time it is not enough to understand modal choices and obviously there are other variables acting. I want in particular as proof that in this table in particular, there are 52% of people who use the car while public transport is faster to go to work. And even 71% of the population is using the car to go to work while the travel time for work are comparable in a 10 minute interval between public transport and car. The reason of the heart, which is the second logical action, still drawing on the work of Max Weber, is to use, or to turn to means of transport according to their preferences, but independently of the comparative effectiveness or comparative prices of these means of transport. There you have under the eyes, in two columns, a body of adjectives cited by people who were interviewed as part of the research which resulted also in the Table I introduced you in the previous <i> slide </ i>. And in fact, these adjectives show that in the background the automobile is preferred to public transport, in this studied population, and can be identified through the words cited and which show a connotation, or provision of use of more or less favorable transportation. If we have in the head the image of an automobile that is fast, comfortable and makes us autonomous, do we not have already a little made our choice, there is a preference to collective transport that is perceived as slow, as binding in terms of lines and schedules and as promoting promiscuity because you have to travel with others. So that's the idea of this second logical action, the reason of the heart. The third action logic is that of habits. If we take the vocabulary of Max Weber, he also speaks of traditional rationality. So the idea that finally always doing the same thing, or having habits or routines, is also a way of being, a way of acting. Seen in transport habits, and much research shows, that modal choices, therefore the use of different means of transport, also respond and sometimes in an extremely massive way to a logic of habit. This is particularly the case for a number of motorists who just do not plan to use other means of transport. I just briefly introduced the three logics of action underlying modal choices. To account for the segmentation of the three logics of action in the population, we conducted a typology. And this typology allows to identify eight specific provisions on the use of means of transport. This typology is based on three dimensions. First the size of the patterns that differentiate individuals using several means of transport of those who do use only one. Secondly, this typology is based on a dimension of values that differentiates people who have a vision of means of transport and transport supply first accordingly to their individual interest, for example the comparison of prices and travel times, or rather people who qualify transport supply based on a common interest, such as their ecological footprint. Finally, the typology is based on a third dimension, which is the dimension of attitudes that distinguishes respondents according to their preferences of use or their attitude towards different means of transport. Typology, as I just said, allows to identify eight population groups, eight groups that correspond eight customary provisions in respect of different means of transport. Then firstly there are three groups that are characterized by a strong anchor of habits and by the use of only one transport system. These three types have exclusive motorists convinced that is to say, people that in their daily lives only use the car to move daily and have a very bad image of all other means of transport. There secondly are the open exclusive motorists that is to say people who only use the car to move in their daily lives but do not specifically look badly at alternatives that are possible, such as public transport or cycling. There is finally the third type that is based on the use of only certain means of transport, this third type are the exclusive alternative modes, that is, people who do not use the car at all as a driver, but use in their daily life public transport, cycling or go on foot. Among the eight customary conditions highlighted, there are two others in which the comparison or preferences are dominant. Multimodal comparators, is a group of people who are highly sensitive to the prices of different options to move but also in comparison of travel times. So these are people who initially have an instrumental logic in their modal choices. A group was also identified, called civic environmentalists, where the logic of the heart is dominant, that is to say they are people who have convictions, namely respect for the environment, and are trying in their practice of everyday mobility to get as close as possible to this ideal which is to try not to use means of transport that would be too polluting. So you see the first five types, the first three that I presented to you, we see that there is a dominant of habits. Here, with these two types, there is first a dominant of the instrumental logic for multimodal comparators and then a dominant of the reason of the heart or of values for the civic environmentalists. The last three types that refer to three other provisions of use of different means of transport are characterized by the fact that in any of the types people can not do exactly what they would like. In fact, in these three types, there is a constraint which is that we use transport means that we do not necessarily want to use. The first of these types, named motorists "forced" to use public transport, these are people who prefer to use the car in their daily lives but for some of their trips are forced to use public transports, or feel they are forced to use public transport, because there is a constraint on the use of the car. This constraint is generally the traffic conditions, traffic jams in particular or conditions of parking. Second type of constraint that we could identify with this type so-called susceptible to alternative modes. These are people who prefer to use in their daily lives other means of transport that the car but for some trips are still obliged to use the car, because in particular there are no offers or easy opportunities to go cycling or go by public transport for some of their trips. And last of these types a bit forced, the people we qualified as anchored in proximity, who are people who do not like to use motorized or mechanized transport. It is often people who are afraid to use these means of transport. This is often an elderly population or people who have experienced trauma in the use of means of transport be it an accident or an event such as an assault which means that eventually they fear. But eventually these people too, those anchored in the vicinity, they try to limit the use of motorized transport but there are still obliged to a number of their movements. Here we come to the end of this video, a somewhat theoretical video. And I just wanted to come back maybe to a point that seems essential to me. What I wanted to show you through this video, is that ultimately the choice of one or more conveyances in daily life, cannot be reduced simply by looking for minimization of travel time and/or minimization of cost. The choice of means of transport are more complex. They refer to provisions which are multiple, which also refer to habits, preferences, and it is essential to take it into account if we want to influence the modal practices.