Photo: Melker Dahlstrand / imagebank.sweden.se

The potential to work remotely has major implications on travel behaviour and public transport service. Since the transport sector is also a main contributor to GHG emissions, including in the Nordic countries, mobility changes also have a great effect on the environment and our aims towards achieving key sustainable development goals.

Since the pandemic , some discussions have continued in the Nordic countries about how to use remote work as a tool for achieving environmental goals. For example, in Finland, the 2023 government programme established by Petteri Orpo suggests that the government will “examine opportunities for remote work in public administration positions with the aim of reducing emissions from travel …” (Finnish Government, 2023, 127).

It is no surprise, therefore, that the theme of transportation is prominent in the latest academic literature. On the one hand, remote work has challenged public transport service. On the other hand, some studies suggest that remote work can act as a tool for reducing emissions from the transport sector by encouraging less travel. However, studies on the changes in travel behaviour thus far have mixed results. Despite these uncertainties, it is evident that remote work influences transportation and how planners and researchers think about commuting. As described by Budnitz et al. (2021), remote work “could favour urban forms different from those traditionally supported by commute-oriented transport networks and mode-identified commuting practices” (157).

While the major threats from COVID-19 have dissipated, many public transport operators continue to suffer from low ridership and reduced attractiveness of public transport due to remote work (Axhausen, 2022; Currie et al., 2021; Beck & Hensher, 2022). Transportation systems in the Nordic Region are no different. The Stockholm region’s public transport system has decreased by about 30% since 2019, which has led the transport authority to reduce service for about 40 bus routes and increase ticket prices for residents (Nordström, 2024-a). Citing a traffic analyst for the region, one media article has directly linked the high numbers of remote workers in Stockholm as the reason why transport numbers remain (and will continue to remain) low (Nordström, 2024-c). While Helsinki’s public transport has also seen a decrease in ridership compared to pre-COVID days, the regional transport authority has taken the opposite approach, reducing fares by about 5% as a way to incentivise passengers to return and testing alternative ticket packages (Lönnqvist & Salorinne, 2022; Nordström, 2024-a; 2024-b). In Oslo, a pilot project was introduced to test out discounted single-trip public transport tickets. The project provides discounts the more frequently one travels using single tickets and is targeted towards people who “commute 1-3 days a week or have a more unpredictable travel pattern” (Ruter, n.d.). As of September 2024, Oslo’s public transport authority, Ruter, has also reduced the cost of 30-day and annual transport cards within Zone 1 (covering the bulk of the municipality; Ruter, 2024). The regional operator Vy also offers “smart tickets” that are price-tailored to the uneven travel patterns of hybrid workers and students who travel regularly between two specific stations (Granath Hansson & Gudmundsdottir, 2024). 

At the same time, some research in the Stockholm region has pointed to the mismatch between public transport service schedules and workers in particular sectors, such as those working in care and service, leading to transport vulnerabilities (Henrion et al., 2023). Workers in these sectors are also those who have less potential for remote work, which raises further questions about how public transport systems can better serve residents. Based on qualitative interviews with transport providers in Denmark, Lindberg et al. (2023) also recommend “greater flexibility in the systems and infrastructures surrounding everyday urban mobilities,” which could include “initiatives for strengthening the opportunities for establishing mobility hubs and investing in MaaS [Mobility as a Service] solutions” (14).  

A majority of municipalities in the Swedish ÖMS region (central Sweden) report that remote work has had a large or fairly large effect on travelling and commuting. While demand for public transport has decreased in many municipalities (ÖMS, 2023), some reports show increasing trends in active mobility such as walking and cycling compared to before the pandemic (WSP, 2023; Henrion et al., 2023; Statista 2023-a). In a study on travel behaviour in the Nordic capitals from before and after the pandemic, researchers noted that people tend to use cars for private trips more often than public transport, with slightly more people indicating their use of the car after the pandemic for such errands and fewer selecting public transport (WSP, 2023). This has also been echoed in some media reports, for example in Stockholm, where transport authorities have noted that they need to consider how to increase public transport ridership for leisure trips rather than on commuting journeys (Nordström, 2023). While all Nordic capitals have had a decrease in public transport ridership for leisure trips after the pandemic, Stockholm has experienced the largest decrease, from 42% to 32% (Statista, 2023-b).

Remote work can also reduce congestion in cities. For example, Loo & Huang (2022) show how work-from-home arrangements reduced congestion in the central business district and urban core of Hong Kong during peak morning commuting hours, though little change was identified in traffic congestion during evening commuting hours. Furthermore, since work-from-home regulations were lifted, traffic congestion has generally returned to its pre-pandemic numbers. In their analysis of human mobility in New York during the pandemic stages, Shearston et al. (2021) also showed how lockdown policies influenced traffic congestion. The researchers see these interventions as a proxy for future large-scale traffic measures that can play a role in reducing mobility. Their study showed the rebound effect of traffic congestion as policies were lifted. Survey results from Currie et al. (2021) also predicted a decline in commuter volume for the city of Melbourne post-pandemic, with the most dramatic commuter volume decreases in the CBD.

Hu et al. (2023) evaluate the effects of changes in mobility behaviour on traffic congestion from another angle. They hypothesise the potential for the pandemic to spark an increase in the use of single occupancy vehicles at the expense of car-pooling or other high-density travel modes like public transport. By looking at commuting data in 118 metropolitan areas in the United States, the research suggests that, if there is a 25% mode shift from transit and carpool to single-occupancy vehicles, residents in many major American cities will experience an increase in travel time between 2 and 20-minutes for their round-trip commutes due to increased traffic congestion (Hu et al., 2023, 2). The authors also suggest that such an increase will have a major negative economic impact on the metropolitan areas. Based on this work, Hu et al. (2023) suggest that these negative time and cost impacts can be relieved by encouraging a percentage of commuters to work from home. Yum (2021) also suggests that telecommuters choose to travel at different times of days compared to regular commuters, assumedly due to congestion. Related to congestion, some literature also mentions the potential to limit noise and air pollution through less commuting behaviour, depending on the modes of transport used to commute in different cities, small towns, or rural areas (e.g., Brown et al., 2021; Arisanti et al., 2024).

Similarities can be seen in the Nordic context. For example, in Helsinki, the city reported that, as remote work becomes more common, fewer commutes are made, but they are longer on average. The effects can lead to decreased traffic performance (fewer commutes) or increased traffic performance (longer commutes on average; Metsäranta et al., 2021). Statistics Sweden (2024) reports that commuting areas around the three largest cities increased between 2020 and 2022 with Stockholm seeing the largest increase. This is hypothesised to stem from larger job markets and larger allowances of remote work. For the 10% that commuted longest in the Stockholm area and had specialised higher education, commuting distances rose from 27 to 40 km one way. Weaker increases were also noted in the Gothenburg (3.9 km) and Malmö areas (4.4 km). Findings from the Swedish Agency for Economic and Regional Growth (Tillväxtverket; 2023) also suggest that the shift to remote work arrangements after the pandemic have enabled managers and professionals with jobs that can be done remotely to move their residence beyond the metropolitan region and combine work from home with occasional long-distance commuting to their city centre workplace. From a rural perspective, Bogason et al. (2024-a) mention the importance of investing in road infrastructure in order to expand residential and labour markets between small towns located near larger urban areas, which has been noted in national strategies such as Norway’s strategy for small towns and larger towns as regional powerhouses.

Research evaluating the relationship between remote work and travel behaviour (frequency and mode of travel) provides mixed results. In some studies, researchers find that remote workers make more non-work-related trips (Budnitz et al., 2020; Greaves et al., 2024). Results from Sepanta and O’Brien (2023) show that commute time and distance decrease for those who work fully remotely; however, they suggest that the long-term impacts of teleworking may result in longer commuting times and distances if telecommuters decide to live further from their office but still work from the office on occasion (e.g., once per week) and also work remotely from somewhere else besides their home. Based on the outcomes of mobility and predictions that people will seek out lower-density areas with more affordable housing, Axhausen (2022) also highlights that the pandemic may lead to a “new wave of sprawl” with a rise in car ownership and transport by car (Axhausen, 2022, 86).

Elldér (2020) used micro-data from the Swedish National Travel Survey to investigate how telework influences daily travel throughout Sweden. Based on the survey respondents, he found that those who telework for the whole day are less likely to travel than those who telework for a partial day or not at all. When they do travel, full-day teleworkers are more likely to use active modes of travel and to “travel shorter distances than those who do not telework” (Elldér, 2020, 6). Full-day teleworkers also made fewer trips than those who telework for a partial day or not at all. Importantly, when evaluating travel distances for teleworkers, the research showed that those living nearer to the city centre, in higher density areas, and around mixed land use tend to travel shorter distances. Elldér’s results echo some studies, but contradict others (e.g., Axhausen, 2022; Budnitz et al., 2020; Greaves et al., 2024) that suggest teleworkers may make more or longer trips compared to non-teleworkers. One reason for this potential difference is his use of micro-data from travel surveys and his research within a Scandinavian context. 

Researchers point to the importance of people’s ability to make chains or bundles of their trips (to make efficient use of the commute by stacking other errands into one’s transport practices; see also Sepanta & O’Brien, 2023). Trip-chaining can be made more feasible for telecommuters who travel for non-related work purposes when they live in higher density areas with shorter distances between each non-work destination. In the academic literature, several studies reported an increase in walking and cycling since the pandemic, particularly in urban areas (perhaps because these environments are more conducive to active mobility given their dense morphology; Currie et al., 2021; Axhausen, 2022). There is a correlation between use of active travel modes and built environment factors such as high density, high diversity of land use, and proximity to the city centre, which is also highlighted in the context of England (Budnitz et al., 2020) and in the Twin Cities metropolitan area in the United States (Yum, 2021), where telecommuters were, in several cases, more likely to walk or bike for leisure activities.

In a case study of telecommuting centres in Stockholm, Bieser and colleagues (2021) found that when people worked from their employer’s office or from telecommuting centres, they used energy efficient transport modes, but when working from home, they more often used the car for private travel needs. Therefore, the researchers conclude that, in order to make remote work more sustainable, people need to have access to and find attractive more energy efficient modes of transport for conducting leisure trips (e.g., running errands, visiting non-work destinations).

Glackin and Moglia (2022) foresee hybrid work as the most common work form and point to transport as a deciding factor on the extent of remote work. Distance to work is said to increase the probability of remote work, while access to timely transport decreases probability. The authors also bring up the possibility that infrastructure investments will depend on local politics and choices between strengthening the CBD or localised strategies working in the other direction.

In a survey of 11 European cities, Nicolini et al. (2022) confirmed that reducing transportation during the national lockdowns of the pandemic resulted in reduced CO₂ emissions. The findings provide a dramatic test case proving that reducing mobility behaviour through policy may be possible and can have a major impact on emissions. As Nicolini et al. (2022) state: “The temporary nature of the observed emission reductions emphasises the need to implement systematic changes in the city ecosystem and people’s lifestyles to achieve effective and sustained climate change mitigation” (10), with changes to mobility playing a major role. Reports from the European Environmental Agency have also shown the clear dip in GHG emissions within the transport sector in 2020 compared to previous years, with a rebound effect after 2021 (EEA, 2023). This is also reflected in the Nordic context where total emissions dropped by about 10% in 2020 (Nordic Statistics Database, 2022). An American study has also shown that the potential for carbon-emissions reductions is higher in car-centric cities compared to cities whose residents already rely on sustainable modes of transport; thus, remote work may play a more strategic role for reducing emissions in some areas over others (Zhang et al., 2023). However, the potential of this largely depends on remote workers’ travel behaviours for non-work purposes or when travelling to a third space to work (Li et al., 2024).  Furthermore, the policy discussion around the long-term effectiveness of this for holistic sustainability is more nuanced and complex, and remote work is not a silver bullet solution by any means.

The international literature also refers to links between remote work and other environmental and transport related concerns. In their research on the carbon footprint of remote work, Zhang et al. (2023) introduce factors of income level and occupation to understand how specific population groups contribute to or are affected by remote work’s carbon reduction potential. By testing scenarios in four US cities, the researchers found that “low-income individuals are predominantly employed in professions with limited remote work opportunities. Paradoxically, they shoulder a more substantial burden in terms of carbon reduction efforts, underscoring the challenges faced by low-income populations in diminishing their carbon footprints” (Zhang et al., 2023).