The paper "Environmental Benefit of Public Transportation through the Eyes of Social Marketers" is a great example of a marketing case study. Social marketing worldwide has been able to have a good track record due to their range of behaviours and effectiveness for both personal and community gain. Community-based social marketing has been a major success in emphasizing positive behaviour. This is social marketing which is based on direct contact among the members of a community and eliminating any barrier to action (European Environment Agency, 2006)). At the moment, most of the trips worldwide are carried out through the use of automobiles.
The increase in the use of automobiles has led to pollution and congestion. Globalization has led to most of the population owning private modes of transport which have worsened the problem. Use of private mode of transport has led to negative impacts on the environment (Cahill, 2010). The number of private vehicles has been growing at a faster pace than public transport modes. This has led to the need to change the mode of transport from private to the public without making it inconveniencing.
There has been pressure by the urban planners to reduce dependence on private mode of transport and encouraging use of public transport (Eurostat, 2011). This has not been as successful as the number of private vehicles users has been increasing. To change transport behaviours, it involves making public transport more attractive which leads to people leaving their cars at home. This report looks at the environmental benefits of public transport through the eyes of social marketers. Benefits of public transport to the environment Public transport has helped a lot in reducing the carbon footprint.
Research has proved that through investing in good public transport, communities can reduce carbon emotions by up to 37 million metric tons annually. The research has also shown that if a single person is able to switch to public transport, it becomes possible to reduce up to 20% pounds of carbon emissions which leads to a saving of 4,800 pounds annually. This has led to the conclusion that the use of public transport is much greener than other actions take in households to curb emissions (Wright & Egan, 2000). In the vehicle's emission, CO2 makes up to 95% of the greenhouse gas emitted.
It has been proved that public transport contributes less greenhouse gas per passenger as compared to private vehicles. Other public means of transport such as rail transport produces 75% less greenhouse gas in comparison with private cars. The environmental benefits are based on the number of passengers that a train or bus can carry and the type of fuel (Green, 2011). When there is an increase in users of public transport, less greenhouse gas is emitted.
The passenger load determines the efficiency of public transport. Research thus proves that riding public transport makes a big difference in air quality and the way natural resources are utilised. A bus which ferries seven passengers is more fuel-efficient than a single occupant private vehicle (Hester & Harrison, 2004). Social Marketing Change has to be initiated by certain organisations. Despite this, marketing can be carried out by anyone such as environmental organisations and community groups. For example, someone can put a sign in an office that promotes public transport.
Marketing requires materials and political support for it to make a big difference (Kotler, Roberto & Lee, 2002). Social marketing has been identified as an avenue that can be used to change community behaviours which are negative. Social marketers have the capability to explain why it’ s more important to use a public mode of transport rather than private cars. This can only be carried out if the social marketers are able to convince the population on the positive impacts of public transport as compared to private transport on the environment.
The three main importances that social marketers advocating for public transport should address are; saving money, time and effort (Strading, 2002).
Australia Bureau of Transport and Regional Economics 2002, Regional public transport in Australia: Long-distance services, trends and projections, Canberra, Bureau of Transport and Regional Economics.
Australia 2013, Public transport use in Australia's capital cities: Modeling and forecasting, Canberra, Australia, Department of Infrastructure and Transport, Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics
Borowski, A., Encel, S & Ozanne, E 2007, Longevity and social change in Australia. Sydney: UNSW Press.
Cahill, M 2010, Transport, environment and society, Maidenhead, U.K., Open University Press.
European Environment Agency 2006, Transport and environment: Facing a dilemma ; TERM 2005 : indicators tracking transport and environment in the European Union, Luxembourg, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
Eurostat 2011, Energy, transport and environment indicators, Luxembourg, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
Green, J 2011, Increasing Public Transport Use with Smart Campaigns, American Society of Landscape Architects, Retrieved 14th December 2014 from, http://dirt.asla.org/2011/06/30/increasing-public-transport-use-with-smart-campaigns/
Hester, R. E & Harrison, R. M 2004, Transport and the environment, Cambridge, Royal Society of Chemistry.
Kotler, P. Roberto, N & Lee, N 2002, Social Marketing: Improving the Quality of Life. Sage Publications, Inc. Thousand Oaks, CA.
Strading, S 2002, “Transport user needs and marketing public transport” in Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers. Municipal Engineer, Vol. 151 Issue1, p. 23-28.
UITP 2012, Grow with public transport, Advancing Public Transport, Retrieved 14th August 2014 from, http://www.uitp.org/grow-public-transport.
United Nations 2002, Policy guidelines for road transport pricing: A practical step-by-step approach. Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific and GTZ GmBH, New York.
Wright, C & Egan, J 2000, “De-Marketing the Car”, Transport Policy volume, Vol. 7, no.4. p 287-294.