This piece was initially written for another transport campaign. We are publishing it in full here, with a few minor changes to update it for 2025.
It is axiomatic that bus use, and bus services, are continually declining. There are many ways in which this is illustrated, often reflecting the viewpoint that is being argued.
Here, we look at short to long term trends, possible explanations and remedies. As far as it’s possible, we examine trends over the last 50 years, and shorter periods within that half century.
We generally draw a line in 2019, as data since then is heavily affected by the Covid pandemic. Nevertheless, there is reason to believe that a ‘post-Covid’ pattern of bus travel is emerging, with, very broadly, bus use in much of Scotland back to around 85% of pre-Covid levels. The patterns of travel are different, and evolving. But the headline figures pre- and post-Covid show a family resemblance.
A first marker is Scotland’s population data. If all else was equal, a rise or fall could be expected to result in higher or lower bus use. The Census shows that from 1951 to 2022, Scotland’s total population varied between 5 and 5.5 million, with a generally rising trend except for 1981 to 2001.
In 1960, there were almost 1,700 million bus trips, compared to about 900 million in 1975 and 360 million in 2019. The the steep post-war decline actually began to level out in the late 1990s, as shown in the graph below.
These are not necessarily journeys by Scotland’s residents. We might expect total passenger journeys to increase, assuming there are now more visitors to Scotland than in 1975 as a consequence of global travel.
While buses still account for three-quarters of all public transport journeys, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-47388550 suggests they suffer ‘as a result of soaring fare prices and increased road congestion’. By contrast, rail passenger journeys originating in Scotland suffered a similar post-war decline before increasing, since at least 1994-95, to 64.9 million in 1999-2000, and 97 million in 2018-19 (Transport Scotland data). Calmac ferries carried over 4.7 million passengers in 2006, compared to nearly 5.6 million in 2019.
In 2023-24, some media reports suggested a mass withdrawal of services in recent years https://www.scotsman.com/news/transport/scotland-bus-routes-scottish-government-labour-franchise-4922927. However, this may overlook the effect of a major statistical correction and changes to how registrations are recorded. Mileage operated in Scotland reveals that since 2016-17 commercial mileage has dropped by 7%, while supported mileage (services subsidised by Councils) dropped by 34%.
The National Transport Strategy update https://www.transport.gov.scot/news/progressing-a-strategy-for-change/ states that patronage fell from 420 million trips in 2012-13 to 301 million in 2022-23 (NB as noted above, the pandemic had a significant impact after 2019). Journey kilometres fell from 327 million (2012-13) to 275 million (2022-23).
However, there are large regional variations. Between 2006-16, the Highlands, Islands and Shetland saw growth of almost 30%, south east Scotland modest growth, south west and Strathclyde a decline of over 20%. The NorthEast, Tayside and central Scotland is slightly below the national trend.
Possible explanations
Often, at this point, ideology, or political convenience, takes over. A common trope is that this is all due to the ending of local authority ownership and/or deregulation of bus services, referring to the decline in bus use since then. https://transform.scot/2024/01/24/transport-myths-sorting-fact-from-fiction/
Edinburgh is often cited as an exemplar of public ownership. Yet here bus and tram ridership declined from nearly 290 million in 1950 (when there were about 100,000 fewer residents) to just over 80 million in 1996-8, before rising to just over 120 million in 2019. Municipally owned bus companies are not immune from collapse; most recently Halton Transport Transport https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-51237490
But, as shown above, bus use was declining well before the end of widespead municipal ownership and deregulation, and began to level off in the 1990s. The regional data shows a significant decline in SW/Strathclyde, with no publicly owned buses, whilst the NE/Tayside/Central region, also with no publicly owned operators, is similar to the national trend. South East Scotland, with a major publicly owned operator, shows a slight rise, but the Highlands, Islands and Shetland, with no publicly owned buses, saw significant growth. (All of Scotland is deregulated)
In 2017 and 2024 KPMG (‘Trends in Scottish Bus Patronage’) showed that the most important factors were car ownership (by far), working patterns, and journey times. The question of how to tackle growing car use is the subject of extensive debate.
Professor David Begg, former Edinburgh Transport Convenor, oversaw the reversal of falling patronage at publicly-owned Lothian Buses from 1997 onwards. In 2024, he argued https://www.scotsman.com/news/transport/push-to-extend-edinburgh-bus-lane-hours-amid-warning-vehicles-will-slow-to-walking-pace-as-times-soar-4652511 and at EBUG’s AGM https://edinburghbususers.group/begg-edinburgh-must-future-proof-its-buses#more-8580
⦁ From 1986-1996 Edinburgh was one of the few UK cities to buck the trend of slower buses; scheduled speeds increased by 5% due to better conventional bus priority.
⦁ Greenways, when introduced, operated all day, six days/week. Bus lane offenders were 15 times more likely to be penalised than today.
⦁ Bus journey times are now increasing again due to congestion; nearly 20% in 10 years on some corridors, with weaker bus lane enforcement and the removal of off-peak bus priority in 2015.
⦁ Journey times had risen almost 1%/yr in the UK’s most congested conurbations. A 10% decrease in speeds reduces patronage by at least 10%. (June 2016 Greener Journeys; The impact of congestion on bus users)
⦁ This is despite contactless ticketing, which cut boarding time to 1.5 seconds/passenger (6 seconds/passenger for exact fare cash payments).
⦁ Edinburgh Council’s case for funding from the Scottish Government’s (now cancelled) Bus Partnership Fund shows that bus priority improvements on eight corridors, cutting journey time by 10% and variability by 25%, has a benefit:cost ratio of 13:1.
Scotland’s three largest cities are keen to cut bus journey times: https://transform.scot/2023/04/10/in-the-slow-lane-investment-in-bus-priority/. Bus gates in Aberdeen reduced journey times by up to 25%, with improved punctuality and reliability; operator savings were recycled to provide free travel for passengers in January 2024. https://news-scot.firstbus.co.uk/news/first-bus-and-stagecoach-announce-free-weekend-bus-travel-in-aberdeen-throughout-january
The Glasgow Connectivity Commission, reporting for Glasgow City Council in 2019 https://www.glasgow.gov.uk/connectivitycommission, noted factors behind Glasgow bus patronage declining more than other UK cities, losing over 70 million passengers/yr in under 10 years across the SPT area:
⦁ poor service quality and passenger information
⦁ one of the UK’s oldest fleets
⦁ worsening journey times
⦁ declining frequencies
⦁ high ticket prices
⦁ a foundering bus partnership
Of course, buses are not limited to the big cities. The bus market is very localised. In rural or partly urban areas many key issues differ. At the risk of making a sweeping generalisation, congestion, and its impact on journey times, have less impact. The other factors identified by KPMG in Trends in Scottish Bus Patronage; car ownership, work patterns and fares become more important, although arguably rising fares are a result of other factors, not a stand-alone factor.
KPMG also identified that while Scotland’s population is growing, this is mainly in major urban areas.
‘Rural’ bus services are also highly segmented. Some simply connect small settlements, others connect them with nearby towns or cities. For example, this article https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cw44jg54pn0o highlighted the expected withdrawal of services in north Scotland because the bus operator was unable to cover the cost of operations, citing reduced passenger demand and higher costs.
A remarkable campaign apparently saved a service between Dumfries and Edinburgh, essentially a rural service between urban areas. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-south-scotland-65112237
What might be considered a ‘rural rural’ service in Killin was threatened when the operator-owner planned to retire. Two attempts to attract other operators failed. The local Council is hesitant to start an internal service due to funding constraints. This illustrates two issues:
⦁ Rural services often depend on a very local company, operating with minimal resources
⦁ Hopes that a local authorities will ‘rescue’ a service are up against the funding constraints they face.
Often bus services are low in the political pecking order. Other services are prioritised; at a national level health and education, at local levels education and social care. Public opinion studies consistently underpin this. The Bus Partnership Fund was cancelled in 2024, with very little fuss.
Transport scarcely features in elections. The political reality is that the less bus services cost the public purse, the less vulnerable they are. Buses are a service, but they broadly need to make an overall financial return to survive.
There is little to suggest the state, in whatever form, will continue indefinitely to subsidise services, as opposed to their users. And subsidised travel is of no use if a service doesn’t exist.