Figure 24. Lisbon Modal Split 2017

(Lisboa Câmara Municipal, 2020). Hence, similar to Budapest, Lisbon intends to decrease approximately 30% of its current private vehicular flows to meet its goals on time.

Figure 24. Lisbon Modal Split 2017. Source: Author based on data from INE (2018)

3.1.6. Brief omparison

All five case studies have a variety of transport modes in their urban mobility systems. For instance, it can be seen in Figure 25 that Rome has the most extensive bus network, both in terms of lines and kilometers length which makes sense due to its size compared to the other selected case studies. However, considering the kilometers per line, Budapest has 2.6 km per bus line, the lowest average among the five cases, which generally could be seen as easier to manage, more predictable, and consequently, a more reliable system that can overcome the disadvantage of more transfers. On the other hand, as shown in Figure 26, Rome has the lowest numbers of lines and kilometers regarding the tram systems, meaning that its tram network is not powerful in the urban displacements. However, Budapest has the highest number of lines, 34, and Vienna has the largest tram network, with 225km, emphasizing the importance of this transport mode for their citizens In addition, regarding mass transport, Figure 27 displays the metro infrastructure overview, where it is notorious that Vienna has the best scenario among the case studies, with five lines corresponding to 83 km in total.