Examining The Performance Impacts of Transit Operating Subsidies
Publication: Journal of Transportation Engineering
Volume 110, Issue 5
Abstract
Transit operating subsidies have recently come under fire on the grounds that they've been largely responsible for the declines in the U.S. transit industry's productivity over the past decade. Surprisingly, until recently, there has been little statistical analysis to demonstrate the effects of subsidies on productivity, cost trends and ridership. The empirical evidence on operating subsidies impacts are reviewed. Results from a recent investigation of the impacts of operating subsidies in California are also presented. Evidence strongly suggests that subsidies have indeed had a degrading effect on transit performance over time, in particular contributing to higher unit costs and lower labor productivity. There's also some indication that operating subsidies might even have more perverse impacts when they are dedicated specifically for transit purposes. Although subsidies have also served to increase U.S. transit ridership, evidence suggests the costs incurred in winning over these additional passengers have been excessive. A combination of user‐side subsidies and providerside subsidies which are distributed on the basis of performance criteria might offer a better approach to underwriting transit expenses.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Barnum, D. T., and Gleason, J. M., Measuring the Influence of Subsidies on Transit Efficiency and Effectiveness, Urban Mass Transportation Administration, Washington, D.C., 1979.
2.
Blalock, Hubert M., Jr., Social Statistics, revised 2nd ed., McGraw‐Hill Book Co. Inc., New York, N.Y., 1979.
3.
Bly, P. H., Webster, F. V., and Pounds, S., “Effects of Subsidies on Urban Public Transport,” Transportation, Vol. 9, 1980, pp. 311–331.
4.
“Broad‐Based Taxes,” and “Motor Vehicle User Charges,” Urban Mass Transportation Administration, Transit Financing Fact Sheet, Office of Methods and Support, Washington, D.C., 1982.
5.
Cervero, Robert, Intergovernmental Responsibilities for Financing Public Transit Services, Urban Mass Transportation, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C., 1982.
6.
Cervero, Robert, “Views on Transit Tax Financing in the U.S.,” Transportation, Vol. 12, 1983, pp. 21–43.
7.
Cervero, Robert, and Black, Gary, “Possible Effects of Eliminating Federal Transit Operating Subsidies,” Transportation Research Record, 1983.
8.
Gortmaker, L., “Transit Financing and the Cities: The Record and the Views of the Nation's Mayors,” Transportation Research Record, 858, pp. 24–29.
9.
Hemily, Brendon, and Meyer, Michael D., “The Future of Urban Public Transportation: The Problems and Opportunities of a Changing Federal Role,” Transportation Law Journal, Vol. 12, 1982, pp. 287–299.
10.
Kirby, R. F., “Pricing Strategies for Public Transportation,” Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 48, pp. 327–334.
11.
LaMare, J. L., “Intergovernmental Finance, Productivity, and the Local Match Question: The Case of California's Transit Subsidy Policy,” Public Administration Review, July, 1981, pp. 463–470.
12.
Lee, D. B., “Evaluation of the Phase Out of Federal Operating Subsidies for Mass Transit,” Staff Paper, U.S. Department of Transportation, Transportation Systems Center, Cambridge, Mass.
13.
Meyer, J., and Gomez‐Ibanez, J., Autos, Transit and Cities, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1981.
14.
National Urban Mass Transportation Statistics, 1981 Section 15 Report, Transportation Systems Center, U.S. Department of Transportation, Cambridge, Mass., 1982.
15.
Parker, J. A., Financing Public Transit: Recent Efforts to Enact Dedicated Revenue Sources and Other Public and Private Sector Initiatives, Urban Mass Transportation Administration, Washington, D.C., 1982.
16.
Pashigian, B., “Consequences and Causes of Public Ownership of Urban Transit Facilities,” Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 84, 1976, pp. 1239–1259.
17.
Pindyck, Robert S., and Rubinfeld, Daniel L., Econometric Models and Economic Forecasts, 2nd ed., McGraw‐Hill Book Co., Inc., New York, N.Y., 1981.
18.
Pickrell, Don H., The Causes of Rising Operating Deficits in Urban Transit, Urban Mass Transportation Administration, Washington, D.C., 1983.
19.
Pucher, J., “Discrimination in Mass Transit,” Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 48, No. 3, 1982, pp. 315–326.
20.
Pucher, J., “Effects of Subsidies on Transit Costs,” Transportation Quarterly, Vol. 36, No. 4, 1982, pp. 549–562.
21.
Sale, J., and Green, B., “Operating Costs and Performance of American Public Transit Systems,” Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 45, No. 1, 1979, pp. 22–27.
22.
“Strong Trend Toward Dedicated Revenue Sources Detailed in Special Report,” U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of Public Affairs, News Release, Washington, D.C., 1982.
23.
Transit Fact Book, Washington, D.C., preliminary estimates, American Public Transit Association, Washington, D.C., 1983.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Transportation Engineering
Volume 110 • Issue 5 • July 1984
Pages: 467 - 480
Copyright
Copyright © 1984 ASCE.
History
Published online: Jul 1, 1984
Published in print: Jul 1984
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.