A framework is developed for evaluating the distributive effects of mass transit subsidies that explicitly considers the inherent spatial interdependences of a transit system, particularly with regard to the nature of cities, and the politically and legally ‘fair’ distribution of scarce public resources. The methodology is demonstrated by means of a simulated urban mass transit system, and a review is presented of previous models and approaches to the question of subsidies at all levels of scale.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AltshulerA, 1969“Transit subsidies: By whom, for whom?”Journal of the American Institute of Planners3584–89
2.
DajaniH SEganM M, 1974“Income distribution effects of the Atlanta transit system”Transportation Research Recordnumber 516, pp 35–46
HägerstrandT, 1965“A Monte Carlo approach to diffusion”European Journal of Sociology643–67
9.
HarveyD, 1973Social Justice and the City (Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Md)
10.
HoachlanderE G, 1976Bay Area Rapid Transit: Who Pays and Who Benefits? WP-267, Institute of Urban and Regional Development, University of California, Berkeley, California
11.
HodgeD C, 1974An Equity Evaluation Model for Urban Mass Transportation: An Assessment of the Spatial and Social Distributions of Benefits and Costs PTI report 7424, Pennsylvania Transportation Institute, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pa
12.
HodgeDGatrellA, 1976“Spatial constraint and the location of urban public facilities”Environment and Planning48215–230
13.
KulashDSilvermanW, 1974Discrimination in Mass Transit paper 712–10, The Urban Institute, Washington, DC
14.
LevinsonH SConradP E, 1979“How to allocate bus route costs”Transit Journal5(2) 54–64
15.
LineberryR L, 1977Equality and Urban Policy: The Distribution of Municipal Public Services (Sage, Beverly Hills, Calif.)
16.
LionP M, 1977“Methodology for the evaluation of alternative subsidy policies” UMTA interim report NJ-11-0004, Transportation Program, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ
17.
McBrayerDHowardD, 1979“Equity: Testing and achieving it in mass transit”Transit Journal5(4) 63–72
18.
MergetA E, 1979“Equity in the distribution of municipal services” in Revitalizing Cities Ed. BryceH JD C Heath, Lexington, Mass) pp 161–191
19.
MillerD R, 1977Equity of Transit Service, Volumes 1 and 2 report DOT-uT-50029, Urban Mass Transportation Administration, Washington, DC
20.
MillerJ HReaJ C, 1973“Comparison of cost models for urban transit”Highway Research Recordnumber 435, pp 11–19
21.
MillsE S, 1972Studies in the Structure of the Urban Economy (Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Md)
22.
NeimanM, 1975Metropology: Toward a More Constructive Research Agenda Sage Professional Papers in Comparative Politics, volume 2, series 04–024 (Sage, Beverly Hills, Calif.)
23.
NelsonKNevelW, 1979“Cost-effectiveness analysis of public transit systems”Traffic Quarterly33241–252
24.
PignataroLCantilliE, 1971“Transportation and the aging”Traffic Engineering July issue 42–46
25.
ProsperiD C, 1977“The evaluation of equity in transit systems” paper presented to Annual Meetings, Association of American Geographers, Salt Lake City, April 1977; abstract published in AAG Program Abstracts: Salt Lake City Eds HillA DMyersT C (Association of American Geographers, Washington, DC)
26.
PucherJ R, 1978Equity in Transit Financing: The Distribution of the Costs and Benefits of Transit Subsidies Among Income Classes PhD dissertation, Department of Urban Studies and Planning, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass
27.
RichR C, 1979“Neglected issues in the study of urban service distributions: A research agenda”Urban Studies16143–156
28.
RobertsJ, 1975“Transport and social equity”Built Environment495–98
29.
RockS M, 1976“Redistributive effects of public transit: Framework and case study”Transportation Research Recordnumber 589, pp 1–7
30.
RoessR P, 1974“Operating cost models for urban public transportation systems and their use in analysis”Transportation Research Recordnumber 490, pp 40–54
31.
SchmennerR W, 1976“The demand for urban bus transit: A route-by-route analysis”Journal of Transportation Economics and Policy1068–85
32.
SyrnickJ RHarveyT N, 1977“Assessing the distribution of user benefits from proposed transportation investments”Transportation Engineering4729–36
33.
UMTA, 1977aProject FARE, Volume I: General DescriptionUrban Mass Transportation Administration, Washington, DC
34.
UMTA, 1977b“Guidelines for Title VI information specific to UMTA programs” circular UMTA CI 160.1, Urban Mass Transportation Administration, Washington, DC
35.
WebberM, 1976The BART Experience: What Have We Learned? monograph 26, Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Berkeley, Calif.
36.
WeissD LHartgenD TCohenG S, 1975“Equity in New York State transit fares” preliminary research report 93, New York State Department of Transportation, Albany, NY
37.
WilliamsO P, 1970Metropolitan Political Analysis: A Social Access Approach (The Free Press, New York)
