Allocating Revenues to Public Transit Operators under an Integrated Fare System
Abstract
A methodology is proposed and a model is developed to address the issue of revenue allocation that arises in most urban public transport systems that implement an integrated fare system and where the transport services are provided by multiple operators. The methodology and models are practical and easy to implement and at the same time scientifically sound, using data collected on a regular basis. The objective for the methodology is to maximize the provided service while introducing incentives to the operators to increase their service quality. The allocation is based on short-term marginal cost. The methodology comprises four components: selection of appropriate performance measures, development of marginal cost factors, data collection and processing, and revenue allocation by using the output of the previous components. The methodology is described in a top-down approach and can be used for the allocation of revenues in a wide range of integrated public transit systems. An application is presented demonstrating the applicability of the methodology and models.
Get full access to this article
View all access and purchase options for this article.
References
1. Miller M. A. Englisher L. Kaplan B. and Halvorsen R. Transit Service Integration Practices: A Survey of U.S. Experiences. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1927, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2005, pp. 101–111.
2. Fairhurst M. H. Fares and Ticketing Policy in London: From Travelcards to Smartcards. Research Report R273. London Transport Planning Department, United Kingdom, July 1993.
3. Walker T. Recent Developments in Automatic Fare Collection. Southern Cubic Pty Ltd., New South Wales, Australia, 1997.
4. Laube F. Fully Integrated Transport Networks: An International Perspective on Applied Solutions. Presented at Ticketing Technologies Conference, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia, 1995.
5. Taylor S. R. H. and Carter D. W. Maryland Mass Transit Administration Fare Simplification: Effects on Ridership and Revenue. In Transportation Research Record 1618, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1998, pp. 125–130.
6. Carter D. and Pollan C. A Joint Effort: Multi-Operator Fare Integration. Booz Allen and Hamilton, Calif., 1994.
7. White P. and Brocklebank P. Urban Travel and the Smartcard. Presented at 1st Smartcard Research and Advanced Application Conference, Lille, France, 1994.
8. Baggaley J. and Fong Choon Khin M. Farecards: The Fair Way Forward? Presented at International Conference on Advanced Technologies in Transportation and Traffic Management, Singapore, May 1994.
9. Study of European Best Practice in the Delivery of Integrated Transport—Report on Stage 3: Transferability. Commission for Integrated Transport. 2001. Nov. 26, 2001. www.cfit.gov.uk/research/ebp/stage3/05.htm. Accessed April 23, 2005.
10. Assessment of Impacts of Change. MARETOPE Deliverable D5. Funded by 5th Framework Programme of the European Community for RTD, 2002.
11. New York City Transit's Fiscal Condition. Independent Budget Office of the City of New York. Aug. 18, 1999. www.ibo.nyc.ny.us/iboreports/transitbrief.html. Accessed April 25, 2005.
12. Pickrell D. H. Federal Operating Assistance for Urban Mass Transit: Assessing a Decade of Experience. In Transportation Research Record 1078, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1986, pp. 1–10.
13. Petersen E. Transit Subsidies in New York and Chicago: Local, State, and Federal Assistance in a Historical Context. Journal of Public Transportation, Vol. 1, No. 4 1997, pp. 23–41.
14. Karlaftis M. and Sinha K. C. Performance-Based Transit Operating Subsidy Allocation: A Before and After Study. Journal of Public Transportation, Vol. 1, No. 2 1997, pp. 1–23.
15. Matherly D. Developing a Performance-Based Transit Allocation Formula. Case Study for a Participatory Process. In Transportation Research Record 1604, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1997, pp. 83–91.
16. Karlaftis M. McCarthy P. and Sinha K. C. The Structure of Public Transit Costs in the Presence of Multiple Serial Correlation. Journal of Transportation and Statistics, Vol. 2, No. 2 1999, pp. 113–122.
17. Hess D. Yoh A. Iseki H. and Taylor B. D. Increasing Transit Ridership: A Survey of Successful Transit Systems in the 1990s. Journal of Public Transportation, Vol. 5, No. 3 2002, pp. 33–65.
18. Hensher D. A. and Houghton E. Performance-Based Contracts for the Bus Sector: Delivering Social and Commercial Value for Money. Institute of Transport Studies, University of Sydney, Australia, July 2002.
19. Small K. A. Urban Transportation Economics. A Volume in the Regional and Urban Economics Section (Arnott R., ed.), Harwood Academic Publishers, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1992.
20. Fielding G. J. Managing Public Transit Strategically. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, Calif., 1987.
21. Hartman R. J. Kurtz E. M. and Winn A. B. TCRP Synthesis 6: The Role of Performance-Based Measures in Allotting Funding For Transit Operations. TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1994.
22. Economics of Bus Drivelines. Department of Transport, London, Jan. 16, 2004. www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_roads/documents/pdf/dft_roads_pdf_026804.pdf. Accessed Aug. 11, 2005.
23. Jara-Diaz S. The Estimation of Transport Cost Functions: A Methodological Review. Transport Reviews, Vol. 2, 1982, pp. 257–278.
24. Laffont J. J. and Tirole J. A Theory of Incentives in Procurement and Regulation. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1993.
25. Giannakopoulou F. F. and Tsiomita M. A Methodology for the Evaluation of Public Transit Service Provision (in Greek). Diploma thesis. Department of Transportation Planning and Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, Greece, 2005.
26. Bertsekas D. Nonlinear Programming, 2nd ed. Athena Scientific, Belmont, Mass, 1999.
27. Gupta A. and Sivakumar A. I. Simulation Based Multiobjective Schedule Optimization in Semiconductor Manufacturing. Proc., 2002 Winter Simulation Conference (Yucesan E. Chen C.-H. Snowdon J. L. and Charnes J. M., eds.), San Diego, Calif., 2002, pp. 1862–1870.
Cite article
Cite article
Cite article
OR
Download to reference manager
If you have citation software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice
Information, rights and permissions
Information
Published In
Article first published: January 2006
Issue published: January 2006
Authors
Metrics and citations
Metrics
Journals metrics
This article was published in Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board.
VIEW ALL JOURNAL METRICSArticle usage*
Total views and downloads: 58
*Article usage tracking started in December 2016
Altmetric
See the impact this article is making through the number of times it’s been read, and the Altmetric Score.
Learn more about the Altmetric Scores
Articles citing this one
Receive email alerts when this article is cited
Web of Science: 0
Crossref: 1
- On the Applicability of Payment Channel Networks for Allocation of Tra...
Figures and tables
Figures & Media
Tables
View Options
Get access
Access options
If you have access to journal content via a personal subscription, university, library, employer or society, select from the options below:
loading institutional access options
Alternatively, view purchase options below:
Purchase 24 hour online access to view and download content.
Access journal content via a DeepDyve subscription or find out more about this option.
