Transport-Related Social Exclusion Among Secondary School Students in Different Sub-Regions of Lower Silesia, Poland: An Activity-Based Approach
02 jul 2025
Acerca de este artículo
Publicado en línea: 02 jul 2025
Páginas: 45 - 58
Recibido: 15 jul 2024
Aceptado: 26 feb 2025
DOI: https://doi.org/10.14746/quageo-2025-0014
Palabras clave
© 2025 Dawid Krysiński et al., published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 3.

Level of activity vs_ level of car utilisation_
No utilisation of private car | Utilisation of private car – some destinations | Utilisation of private car – all destinations | In total | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
N | % | N | % | N | % | N | % | |
Low level of activity | 26 | 21.10% | 94 | 23.20% | 7 | 6.60% | 127 | 20.00% |
Moderate level of activity | 77 | 62.60% | 238 | 58.60% | 73 | 68.90% | 388 | 61.10% |
High level of activity | 20 | 16.30% | 74 | 18.20% | 26 | 24.50% | 120 | 18.90% |
In total | 123 | 100.00% | 406 | 100.00% | 106 | 100.00% | 635 | 100.00% |
Ordinal regression coefficients for the level of respondents’ activity (Model I) and the level of car utilisation (Model II) (higher coefficient = higher level of activity or car utilisation)_
Coefficients | ||
---|---|---|
Model I | Model II | |
Gender = woman | 0.369 |
–0.121 |
Gender = man | ref. | ref. |
Economic condition = bad | –1.052 |
–0.254 |
Economic condition = moderate | 0.115 | –0.578 |
Economic condition = good | ref. | ref. |
HH location = more than 5 km from commune centre | –0.540 |
0.717 |
HH location = up to 5 km from commune centre | 0.107 | 1.026 |
HH location = commune centre | ref. | ref. |
County = other counties | –0.380 | –1.016 |
County = Oleśnica | 0.233 | –0.98 |
County = Milicz | 0.568 | –0.512 |
County = Góra | ref. | ref. |
Car utilisation = no | –0.775 |
– |
Car utilisation = some destinations | –0.784 |
– |
Car utilisation = all destinations | ref. | – |
Frequency of PT = bad assessment | – | 0.686 |
Frequency of PT = moderate assessment | – | –0.114 |
Frequency of PT = good assessment | – | ref. |
Attitudes towards public transport = positive | – | –0.465 |
Attitudes towards public transport = neutral | – | 0.149 |
Attitudes towards public transport = negative | – | ref. |
Model fitting (χ2) | 48.081 |
80.697 |
Goodness of fit (Pearson χ2) | 232.438 | 421.882 |
Goodness of fit (Deviance χ2) | 262.101 | 387.406 |
Pseudo-R2 Nagelkerke | 0.09 | 0.16 |
Test of parallel lines (χ2) | 16.116 | 17.436 |
Distribution of the basic variables_
Variable | Category | Size | Share | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Gender | Woman | 349 | 55% | ||
Man | 286 | 45% | |||
Household location | Commune centre | 338 | 53% | ||
Up to 5 km from commune centre | 117 | 18% | |||
More than 5 km from commune centre | 180 | 23% | |||
County | Góra | 52 | 8% | ||
Oleśnica | 406 | 64% | |||
Milicz | 135 | 21% | |||
Other | 42 | 7% | |||
Household economic condition | Bad | 45 | 7% | ||
Moderate | 114 | 18% | |||
Good | 476 | 75% | |||
Level of car utilisation | No utilisation | 123 | 19% | ||
Some destinations | 406 | 64% | |||
All destinations | 106 | 17% |
Results of χ2 tests measuring differences in performance of particular activities by respondents from peripheral locations_
Name of activity | ||
---|---|---|
Purchases of clothes | ||
Purchases of personal things | 3.105 | |
Cinema visits | ||
Purchases of cosmetics | 6.218 | |
Purchases of books | 5.263 | |
Attending concerts | ||
Purchases of technical equipments | 3.279 | |
Attending sport events | ||
Tutoring/private lessons | 5.412 | |
Sport activities | ||
Courses | 4.567 | |
Interest clubs | 5.207 | |
Remedial classes | 0.792 |
Expected improvements in public transport in the household location_
Expected improvement | Level of activity | Level of car utilisation | In total | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Low | Moderate | High | No utilisation | 1–2 destinations | All destinations | ||
% in column |
|||||||
Increased frequency of services | 47% | 56% | 59% | 63% | 56% | 51% | 54% |
New public transport connections | 23% | 31% | 33% | 33% | 26% | 31% | 29% |
Lower ticket prices | 34% | 28% | 26% | 30% | 28% | 30% | 29% |
Improved punctuality | 15% | 18% | 13% | 27% | 19% | 12% | 16% |
Increased comfort of journeys | 8% | 15% | 18% | 7% | 15% | 13% | 13% |
Upgraded bus stop infrastructure | 5% | 7% | 5% | 13% | 5% | 5% | 6% |
Increased feeling of security | 3% | 4% | 3% | 3% | 5% | 3% | 4% |
Upgraded fleet | 3% | 2% | 0% | 3% | 1% | 3% | 2% |
Other factors | 3% | 1% | 3% | 0% | 2% | 1% | 1% |
Nothing | 23% | 13% | 13% | 3% | 14% | 20% | 16% |
Results of χ2 tests measuring differences in performance of particular activities by respondents with different levels of car use_
Name of activity | ||
---|---|---|
Purchases of clothes | ||
Purchases of personal things | 5.171 | |
Cinema visits | 5.148 | |
Purchases of cosmetics | 1.263 | |
Purchases of books | 3.513 | |
Attending concerts | ||
Purchases of technical equipments | ||
Attending sport events | ||
Tutoring/private lessons | 1.642 | |
Sport activities | 4.769 | |
Courses | 4.433 | |
Interest clubs | ||
Remedial classes | 1.405 |