Decreasing fare evasion without fines? A microeconomic analysis

Guarda, Pablo; Galilea, Patricia; Handy, Susan; Muñoz, Juan Carlos; Ortúzar, Juan de Dios

doi:10.1016/j.retrec.2016.06.001

Cited by 24 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Guarda et al [3] found that evasion rates increase with increases in (i) the number of users boarding or alighting at a given bus door, (ii) the number of users boarding through a rear door, (iii) occupancy levels, and (iv) headways. In Guarda et al [7], the authors concluded that evasion rates are lower at bus stops near intermodal and Metro stations and those located in higher income areas. Finally, using official data on evasion, Troncoso and de Grange [18] showed that the evasion rate rises two percentage points with a 10% increase in fares but falls 0.8 percentage points with a 10% increase in ticket inspections.…”

Section: Literature Surveymentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Most published research has focused on explaining public transport fare evasion in terms of the existing infrastructure and other physical conditions (operating factors, vehicle characteristics, use of ticket barriers, etc.) and determining the best measures for reducing the evasion rate [3,7,[13][14][15][16][17][18][19].…”

Section: Literature Surveymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Among the steps that have been taken is the creation of an anti-evasion unit, which developed an evasion reduction plan focused on such actions as more vigorous inspection and pursuit of evaders through bigger fines, increased ticket checks and the creation of an evader registry, as recommended by various authors [3,[6][7][8]. Unfortunately, none of these measures has had much success in mitigating the problem.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Fare Evasion in Public Transport: Grouping Transantiago Users’ Behavior

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A survey was conducted in July 2018 on the public bus system in Santiago, Chile, in which 457 users were asked to respond to a list of 42 statements expressing a range of attitudes on different aspects of the problem of fare evasion. The respondents were first categorized according to whether they had been observed paying or not paying the fare, and their responses were then subjected to separate cluster analyses that partitioned the respondents into groups according to their views on each survey statement. The analyses identified four distinguishable types or groups among those who did not pay the fare—radical, strategic, ambivalent, and accidental evaders—and three groups among those who did pay—proud, empathetic, and circumstantial evaders. The distinguishing factors motivating the decision to pay or not to pay the fare were found generally to reflect values and attitudes or ideologies but were also influenced by users’ perception of the social acceptability of evasion, the presence of anti-evasion measures, and how “organized” they were in taking care to have a farecard with them when planning to take a bus.

show abstract

Section: Literature Surveymentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Literature Surveymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Fare Evasion in Public Transport: Grouping Transantiago Users’ Behavior

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If fare evasion can be cost-effectively reduced, whatever the ruling fare policy, then the sustainable funding challenge is made somewhat easier. Guarda et al (2015) identified a number of factors that help to explain the level of fare evasion on Santiago public transport. The explanatory variables that were found to be statistically significant included the level of inspection, the proximity to a metro or intermodal station, the level of bus occupancy, period of the day, geographical location and the number of passengers boarding and alighting at a bus stop.…”

Section: Fare Policy and Fare Evasionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Workshop 3 report: Sustainable funding sources and related cost benefit measurements

Stanley

Levinson

2016

Research in Transportation Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recognising that public transport services generally deliver substantial benefits for society but frequently require operating and capital funding support, this Workshop sought to find ways to bridge this benefit/ funding gap, particularly through benefit monetization. It elaborated a wide range of benefits from public transport services, to both users and non-users. In regard to non-users, there was a particular focus on the role of public transport in promoting positive external benefits, such as agglomeration economies, and reducing the negative external costs of car use. A number of ways in which the service funding requirement might be reduced by improved system management were considered, such as better fare evasion practices and more effective public private partnerships. A range of funding opportunities was then reviewed, from which two preferred bundles were developed. Value capture was seen as a vital funding opportunity, both for supporting operating funding and capital funding requirements. Funding circumstances that were seen as more properly a governmental responsibility were identified.

show abstract

“…More recently, a series of studies have examined the impacts of reducing the amount of physical control over ticketing, examining the trade-off between the potential costs (revenue lost from fare evasion, increased salaries for ticket inspections) and benefits (speed and reliability improvements, reduced stop dwell time, increased ridership, lower vehicle operational and purchase costs) [16,17] as well fare evader behaviour [18,19]. Theoretical modelling to address fare evasion and ticket forgery is quite popular, usually using econometric approaches or game-theory [20][21][22], however these studies often focus on mathematically estimating the optimal inspection rate or patrol location to reduce fare evasion or maximise profit [23][24][25].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fare Evasion and Ticket Forgery in Public Transport: Insights from Germany, Austria and Switzerland

Fürst

Herold

2018

Societies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Local public transport companies provide important mobility services to the general public. Although these services are usually subsidised, companies rely on revenues generated by ticket sales. Therefore, fare evasion (i.e., people using a transport service without paying for it) and ticket forgery (the production of an illegal ticket facsimile) have considerable influence on the companies’ economic sustainability. As existing research regarding the economic perspective is limited, this paper presents a Delphi study that investigates the phenomena with a survey of experts in public transport companies and transport associations in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. The findings of the survey provide insights into the overall perception and discuss relevant aspects of both fare evasion and ticket forgery, thereby not only highlighting practical implications, but also helping policy makers shape adequate policies for public transport in societies.

show abstract

Decreasing fare evasion without fines? A microeconomic analysis

Cited by 24 publications

References 5 publications

Fare Evasion in Public Transport: Grouping Transantiago Users’ Behavior

Fare Evasion in Public Transport: Grouping Transantiago Users’ Behavior

Workshop 3 report: Sustainable funding sources and related cost benefit measurements

Fare Evasion and Ticket Forgery in Public Transport: Insights from Germany, Austria and Switzerland

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About