---
title: "Intermodality: the key to a more efficient transport system?"
url: "https://www.systra.com/en/expert_insights/intermodality-the-key-to-a-more-efficient-transport-system/"
type: expert_insights
date_published: 2025-05-15
date_modified: 2025-07-01
schema:
  @type: WebPage
language: en-US
word_count: 1536
reading_time: 8 min
canonical: "https://www.systra.com/en/expert_insights/intermodality-the-key-to-a-more-efficient-transport-system/"
featured_image: "https://www.systra.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/header.jpg"
type-insight:
  - Intermodality
---

# Intermodality: the key to a more efficient transport system?

![Intermodality: the key to a more efficient transport system?](https://www.systra.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/header.jpg)

**Faced with the challenges of ecological transition, urban congestion and increased mobility needs, intermodality is now an essential pillar of mobility policies. Beyond the concept, its implementation raises technical, institutional and cultural challenges. We take a look at an operational imperative that is becoming a global standard and consider the practical conditions for its success.**

### A new imperative for cities and regions

Intermodality refers to a user’s
**ability to combine several modes of transport in the same journey, in a fluid and optimised way**
. What was, until recently, a planning ideal, is gradually becoming a necessity
incorporated into specifications, at the crossroads of the requirements of
transport organising authorities and the climate ambitions of major cities.

Fuelled by the search for credible alternatives to the private car and by the
need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, intermodality aims to create a
coherent, efficient, easy-to-understand transport system that is attractive to
all user profiles. It is the result of a paradigm shift in mobility: travel is
no longer conceived from station to station, but from point of departure to
point of arrival ‘seamlessly’ for users. Its success depends on a series of
levers ranging from the resolution of micro-irritants to the overall
architecture of its governance, which makes its implementation complex.

**The keys to successful intermodality**:

- Physical: facilities to simplify connections (connected platforms,
  footbridges, large and intuitive car parks, PRM accessibility, station
  signalling)
- Fares: integrated transport tickets, single or combined fares, global
  subscriptions
- Software: real-time multimodal information, MaaS (Mobility as a Service)
  applications, quality of the user experience, the station as a destination in
  itself
- Service offer: timetables designed to ensure reasonable waiting times (e.g.
  buses should bring passengers to the station a few minutes before their train,
  not 30 minutes before)

### A complex ambition

However, the intermodal promise is not self-evident. On the ground, the
obstacles are numerous and often invisible: poorly designed load breaks, a lack
of multimodal signage, disconnected management between operators, or even a
mismatch between what is on offer and how it is used.

In fast-growing cities, intermodality is often hampered by fragmented governance
and a lack of coordination regarding investments. The examples of metro systems
in certain cities, which have under-performed in terms of ridership, and which
were built without reorganising the surface networks or integrating fares,
illustrate the limits of a non-systemic approach. In developed countries, it is
land constraints, legal rigidities and inherited planning logics that are
holding back the transformation.

Intermodality is also a question of detail: pavements that are too narrow, a
footbridge that is not properly aligned, unintuitive parking or uncoordinated
timetables are enough to put users off. The passenger experience is becoming a
key criterion, even in densely populated cities such as Hong Kong or Singapore,
where the quality of modal transfer depends as much on the architecture as on
the legibility of the journey or the services offered at the station.

The difficulty is also cultural: travel habits and expectations in terms of
comfort and speed vary greatly. Integrating taxis, shared mobility services and
active modes into the overall system requires constant adaptability. However,
the use of each mode or flow linked to the system increases tenfold, and in turn
reinforces the relevance of the overall mobility scheme.

### What works: levers and good practice

SYSTRA is involved in many projects where intermodality is a key issue. In
Ethiopia, Papua New Guinea and Togo, the development of Sustainable Urban
Mobility Plans (SUMPs) makes it possible to structure a clear, hierarchical
multimodal network from the outset. By bringing all the players to the table,
planning makes it possible to tackle the problem of urban sprawl by avoiding the
uncoordinated growth of different networks, or of an informal and unregulated
transport offer, and instead build a more sustainable form of collective
mobility.

In Dire Dawa, Ethiopia, for example, the SUMP designed by SYSTRA is based on
surveys of a thousand households, local consultation and a 20-year projection to
structure the transition from small-scale mobility to a more massified offer.
The aim is to create the conditions to ensure that the development of the city,
which has not yet begun its urban transition, does not lead to an explosion in
individual motorised modes of transport.

![Children playing foorball in front of the ethiopia to djibouti railway station, Dire dawa region, Dire dawa, Ethiopia](https://www.systra.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/gettyimages-dire-dawa-train-station-474x266.jpg)

_Dire Dawa station, Ethiopia_

In Papua New Guinea, the SUMP project for Port Moresby aims to create the
conditions for low-carbon mobility. SYSTRA’s teams are working with the local
authorities and residents to define an intermodal strategy adapted to the island
context and demographic pressure. The aim is twofold: to promote accessibility
for all and to limit the ecological footprint of transport.

![Aerial View of Port Moresby. Papua New Guinea](https://www.systra.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/gettyimages-aerial-view-of-port-moresby-papua-new-guinea-474x266.jpg)

_Aerial View of Port Moresby. Papua New Guinea_

In more mature cities, such as Montreal, investment in multimodal interchanges
has encouraged bimodal transport, with detailed modelling of flows and a
reduction in connection times. SYSTRA deploys its transport modelling and
behavioural simulation tools (such as Quetzal and Legion) to optimise the design
and sizing of modal interfaces. Dynamic modelling for pedestrians and cyclists,
as well as road access tests, enable the MEP to be designed as a genuine
catalyst for modal transfer.

![Subway train arriving in a Montreal subway station. Everyday](https://www.systra.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/gettyimages-841575812-474x266.jpg)

_The Montreal metro_

The example of Old Oak Common in London illustrates how a station can become the
driving force behind an integrated urban transformation. Connecting the future
HS2 high-speed line, the regional networks (Great Western Main Line), the
Heathrow Express airport shuttle and the Underground’s Elizabeth Line, this
intermodal station is part of a vast urban regeneration operation. According to
an analysis by Arcadis, more than 19,000 jobs and 22,000 homes are expected in
the area by 2025. The development of the forecourt, cycle paths and interface
with local transport make this project a model of intermodal, urban and
environmental integration.

![](https://www.systra.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/hs2-ooc-station-approach-view-474x266.jpg)

_Old Oak Common Station approach_

A few thousand kilometres away, the West Kowloon terminal has connected Hong
Kong to the rest of China through a fine, almost seamless interface between
long-distance high-speed rail and the urban metro network (MRT). In addition to
its architectural beauty, the station has been designed to integrate the
existing networks within a multimodal hub and a residential, business and
cultural district. By taking the road network underground, for example, it has
been possible to integrate the whole complex into the surrounding urban fabric
and create a continuity on the surface that is conducive to walking, which is
essential to the vitality of the commercial and cultural activities surrounding
the terminal.

![West kowloon station exteior, high speed rail hong kong](https://www.systra.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/gettyimages-1162488577-west-kowloon-terminus-hong-kong-474x266.jpg)

_View of West Kowloon Terminal, Hong Kong_

### Use the system as a lever

Intermodality is not a miracle solution, but a paradigm shift. It requires a
systemic vision of mobility, closer cooperation between players, and constant
attention to actual usage and changes in demand.

In areas undergoing change, it is an opportunity to structure transport
provision in a sustainable way. In metropolitan areas that are already densely
populated, it is the only way to make the system more fluid, more economical,
and more attractive. It also enables the benefits of major infrastructure
projects to be maximised, by ensuring that they form part of a coherent network.
Whatever the geography, the evidence is clear: integration benefits all modes of
transport that join it.

At SYSTRA, this vision is embodied in all our projects, where intermodality is
always seen as a lever for sustainability, efficiency and the transformation of
the region. In the face of climate, energy and social crises, intermodality is
also an essential tool for urban resilience and spatial justice, for mobility
that is accessible to all and integrated into local dynamics.

| CITY | MODAL SHARE |
| --- | --- |
| Paris, France󠀁^(1)󠁿 | ● Walking: 52% ● Public transport: 32%● Car: 13%● Bicycle: 3% |
| London, United Kingdom󠀁^(2)󠁿 | ● Public transport: 37% ● Car: 36%● Walking: 24%● Bicycle: 3% |
| Singapore󠀁^(3)󠁿 | ● Public transport: 44% ● Car: 29%● Walking: 22%● Bicycle: 1% |
| Santiago, Chile󠀁^(4)󠁿 | ● Active Mobilities: 38.5% ● Car: 30.8%● Public transport: 18.5%● Other: 12.2% |
| Jakarta, Indonesia󠀁^(5)󠁿 | ● Car and motorcycles: 77% ● Shared mobility: 13%● Public transport: 10% |
| Mumbai, India󠀁^(6)󠁿 | ● Public transport: 45% ● Walking: 27%● Cars and motorcycles: 22%● Bicycle: 6% |

^(1)Source :
[ADETEC expertise report](http://www.adetec-deplacements.com/Parts%20modales%20et%20partage%20de%20l%27espace%20dans%20les%20grandes%20villes%20fran%E7aises%20-%20rapport%20%28ADETEC%29.pdf)
, July 2021

^(2)Source :
[Institut Paris Région report](https://www.institutparisregion.fr/fileadmin/NewEtudes/000pack2/Etude_2078/Comparaison_AO_IAU_20191010_VF.pdf)
, October 2019

^(3)Source :
[Institut Paris Région report](https://www.institutparisregion.fr/fileadmin/NewEtudes/000pack2/Etude_2078/Comparaison_AO_IAU_20191010_VF.pdf)
, October 2019

^(4)Source :
[Observatorio de Movilidad Urbana](https://omu-latam.org/indicadores/), 2015

^(5)Source :
[TUMI Initiative](https://transformative-mobility.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/Jakarta-Deep-Dive_Rev_KP_SK.pdf)
et Jakarta Transport Agency, 2022

^(6)Source :
[TUMI Initiative](https://transformative-mobility.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Mumbai-Deep-Dive.pdf)
, 2022​