Fare Evasion in Public Transport: Grouping Transantiago Users’ Behavior

Abstract

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.

Towards a equitable approach to tackling the fare evasion problem: a scoping literature review and case study analysis

“…According to this research, fare evaders may be radical evaders, strategic evaders, ambivalent evaders, or accidental evaders (Gonzalez et al, 2019). Radical evaders were those who did not actively carry a fare card or load it with funds despite anticipating the need to take transit (Gonzalez et al, 2019). In terms of their attitudes and beliefs, this group did not see fare evasion as an illicit and disrespectful act (Gonzalez et al, 2019).…”

“…This was done through an on-board survey that received 457 responses throughout July of 2018. According to this research, fare evaders may be radical evaders, strategic evaders, ambivalent evaders, or accidental evaders (Gonzalez et al, 2019). Radical evaders were those who did not actively carry a fare card or load it with funds despite anticipating the need to take transit (Gonzalez et al, 2019).…”

“…Radical evaders were those who did not actively carry a fare card or load it with funds despite anticipating the need to take transit (Gonzalez et al, 2019). In terms of their attitudes and beliefs, this group did not see fare evasion as an illicit and disrespectful act (Gonzalez et al, 2019). Strategic evaders, on the other hand, were slightly different in their behaviour and their attitudes.…”

“…According to Salis et al (2017), while calculating fare evaders represent nearly half of all fare evaders, chronic fare evaders represent about a third of them. Gonzalez, Busco and Codocedo (2019), on the other hand, have created a typology of not just fare evaders but all passengers on public transit in Santiago, Chile. This was done through an on-board survey that received 457 responses throughout July of 2018.…”

Fare inspection patrols scheduling in transit systems using a Stackelberg game approach

“…For example, passengers who start their path at station s at τ rs and end at station s ′ at τ rs ′ are of the same type. The attitude of passengers towards fare evasion can be classified in different ways (González et al (2019), Salis et al (2017), Delbosc and Currie (2016), Hauber (1980)). In this paper we assume that passengers may behave according to two profiles: honest passengers always pay the fees whereas opportunistic passengers make their decision about buying a ticket or not based solely on the expected cost of their trip which depends on the probability of being inspected.…”