Co-funded by:
7th framework programme of the European Commission, DG MOVE


http://ec.europa.eu/research/index.cfm
http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/home_en.html

Teleworking

FACT SHEET NO.: Cat-No.8 / Subcat-No.8.1-2

General Information

Title

FACT SHEET NO.: Cat-No.8 / Subcat-No.8.1-2

Category

8. Other

Subcategory

8.1 Alternative commuting solutions

Transport policy measure (TPM)

Teleworking

Description of TPM

Teleworking can be defined as a method of organising and/or performing work in which a considerable proportion of an employee’s working time is:
- away from the firm’s premises or where the output is delivered; and
- when work is done using information technology and technology for data transmission, in particular the Internet.
It includes various forms of telework: home-based, mobile, teleconferencing, tele-centers.

Implementation examples

Germany: LVM in Münster
Belgium: Alcatel
UK: AA call centres / British Airports Authority, Heathrow
France: DANEL Group
USA: First Interstate Bank / Washington State Department of Transportation / City of Redmond

Objectives of TPM

In a 'transport' orientated view, the TPM aim at reducing commuting trips (and therefore congestion and related pollutant emissions).
From a social point of view, the objective is mainly to improve the balance between professional and private life, in the view of increasing quality of life.
From the employer point of view, the TPM might reduce cost, increase productivity and competitiveness.
Full-time and part-time teleworking may produce different impacts in terms of size: impacts may be smoothed (or even be negligible) in case of part-time option, depending also on the work schedule. The impacts also depend on the number of employees opting in teleworking.

Choice of transport mode / Multimodality

No major change

Origin and/or destination of trip

No major change

Trip frequency

Major change [2] [3] [5] [6] [8] [9]

Choice of route

Possible change

Timing (day, hour)

Possible change [2] [5] [6] [8] [9]

Occupancy rate / Loading factor

Possible change, depending on choice during the selected time period. [6] [9]

Energy efficiency / Energy usage

Possible change, depending on mode choice during the selected time period and on the original situation [2] [3 [5] [8]

Main source

[1] European Commission DG EMPL (2009): Flexible working time arrangements and gender equality - A comparative review of 30 European countries
[2] European Commission (2003): DEESD project: Telework and sustainable development A case study with the Global eSustainability Initiative (GeSI)
[3] European Commission (2002): eWork 2002 - Status Report on New Ways to Work in the Knowledge Economy
[4] House of Commons All-Party Parliamentary Small Business Group (2009): Flexible Working: Challenges for Business, UK
[5] DTLR (2002), The Impact of Information and Communications Technologies on Travel and Freight Distribution Patterns: Review and Assessment of Literature. Final Report, UK
[6] G. Lyons, A. Felstead (2007): The impact of teleworking and teleconferencing on transport policy, ESRC, UK
[7] Ministerie van Verkeer en Waterstaat (2006): Nota Mobiliteit. Deel IV - Na parlementaire behandeling vastgestelde PKB
[8] Victoria Transport Policy Institute, Telework (http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm43.htm), CA
[9] Transport for London (2011): Smarter Working guide, London (UK)

Traffic Impacts

Passengers 

         

Transport operators 

           

Unassigned 

         

Travel or transport time

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Risk of congestion

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Vehicle mileage

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Service and comfort

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Overall impacts on social groups

Reduced stress related to travelling, less congestion or crowded public transport modes, especially during peak hour [6] [9].

Implementation phase

Operation phase

Summary / comments concerning the main impacts

- less congestion and reduced transport time for road transport, especially during peak hour [2] [3] [6] [7] [8] [9]
- less commuting trips, especially during peak hour [2] [3] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]
- teleworking might generate more trips for non-commuting purposes, eroding the reduction of total travel [2] [3] [5]
- indirectly road freight transport might benefit from less congestion and reduced transport time
- public transport service might need to be adjusted according to the new demand (reduced for commuting trips and peak hours)
- Telework tends to be particularly attractive to longer-distance commuters, so vehicle-km reductions tend to be relatively high [5] [8]

Quantification of impacts

commuting vehicle-miles decreased by 2.3% to 4.2%, total commute travel reduced by 10% in UK, total household travel reduced by 0.6-1.1% [5]; if 10% of the workforce telecommutes on any given day, total vehicle travel would decline by 1% to 4% in US study; net reduction is 0.6% of household travel if 6.1% of the California workforce may currently telecommute 1.2 days a week on average [8]; -0.9% of the total commuting distance travelled, and -0.2% to -1.6% (or +2.5% with rebound effect) of all passenger kilometres [2]

Economic Impacts

Passengers 

         

Transport operators 

           

Unassigned 

         

Transport costs

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Private income / commercial turn over

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Revenues in the transport sector

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Sectoral competitiveness

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Spatial competitiveness

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Housing expenditures

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Insurance costs

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Health service costs

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Public authorities & adm. burdens on businesses

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Public income (e.g.: taxes, charges)

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Third countries and international relations

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Overall impacts on social groups

Possible reduction of transport costs for passengers, in case of reduced use. On the other hand, revenues in the transport sector might be slightly reduced. From the perspective of the enterprise, sectoral competitivness might be incresed, resulting from efficient and effective staff utilisation.

Implementation phase

Operation phase

Summary / comments concerning the main impacts

- sectoral competitiveness of enterprise might be increased, resulting from efficient and effective staff utilisation [9]
- possible saving of car operation and maintenance costs, in case of reduced use [7] [8]
- revenues for public transport operator might be sligthly reduced, depending on mode choice
- possible additional private investment to set up home / mobile equipment, planning program, security and utility expenses [8]
- possible saving for the company due to decreased absenteeism, tardiness and turnover, and increased productivity [2] [8] [9]

Quantification of impacts


Social Impacts
Environmental Impacts

Passengers 

         

Transport operators 

           

Unassigned 

         

Air pollutants

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Noise emissions

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Visual quality of the landscape

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Land use

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Climate

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Renewable or non-renewable resources

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Overall impacts on social groups

impacts on air pollution [2] [3] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9]

Implementation phase

Operation phase

Summary / comments concerning the main impacts

- Teleworking might impact on air pollution [2] [3] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9].
- Climate change [3] [6] [8] and noise emission, in case of an overall reduction of trips.
- It might encourage more dispersed land use (sprawl) [8].

Quantification of impacts


0  Comments

Write a comment for this page

Response to:  Direct response to the article