This map shows the average commuting time from home to work in Europe.
(Author: Maps.interlude, Link to image information and dfferent resolutions )
It might be surprising that, in spite of wildly different traffic systems and large differences in the use share of cars, these times are so similar.
An explanation is given in the wikipedia article on Marchetti’s Constant. Basically, the time spent commuting is mostly an anthropological constant, and is largely independent of means of transport and culture.
In other words, if we use faster means of transport, we almost automatically commute larger distances - regardless whether this improves our quality of life or not.
This relationship should probably be central in modern traffic planning, but it is often not considered. (There is an interesting article in German by the traffic scientist Rudolf Pfleiderer, titled “Das Phänomen Verkehr”, which describes in more detail the relationships between traffic, speed, and distance - perhaps somebody knows a good English article?)
The question is: From the majority of people with short commutes, who needs really a car for such low distances?
well some people will be driving for 25 minutes, that’s already quite the distance. and public transport isn’t an option for everyone living in rural areas
Depends on the environment. In cities, the typical average speed of cars is around 35 km/h. So, you can travel a distance of about 15 kilometers in that time, which won’t be much more than in a fast commuter train, or a subway. (In fact, I go about 14 kilometers by bike, and it’s usually faster door-to-door than the commuter train).
i bike 20km every single day, i know it’s doable :)
I have about 60 minute commute, but a car would make it 120 minutes, so fuck that shit. I spend commute as office hours, so my time commuting without working is practically 15 minutes. So do I have a long or short commute?
I’d say you have a smart commute.
I guess it depends on what you mean by “short”. It takes me 40 minutes by car to get to work if there’s traffic, 30 by motorbike or car with no traffic, 60 by bicycle and I’d need a shower when I arrive. Public transport would be over 60 minutes because of inconvenient line changes.
I used to cycle to work irregularly when I was nearer, but it wasn’t great: my city used to be a bike-first city, but nowadays there’s too many cars and the infrastructure hasn’t kept up, bikes used to go on the road, and now it’s not possible, bicycle lanes have been added but they’ve done a poor job, with frequent crossings and slow-downs.
The point of the article with the Marchetti constant is: You probably don’t go that far because you absolutely, objectively need to. Instead, you probably go that far because you have half an hour time to commute (which is the time budget of most people), and can use a car. The fact that you use a car probably causes you to go a farther distance.
Proof: People who voluntarily don’t use cars see much less need to commute such distances.
I guess my constant would be a little lower then, this is the longest commute I’ve ever had and it’s supposed to be temporary, moreover I have remote work days on contract.
With “short” I mean no longer than the averages shown in the map. With an average time <= 30 minutes and an average car speed of ~ 35 km/h in cities, this translates to about 18 kilometers of distance.
Of course, there are people which commute longer or farther. But as the map shows, they are the exception - not the norm.