Public transportation objectives and rider demographics: are transit’s priorities poor public policy?

Taylor, Brian D.; Morris, Eric A.

doi:10.1007/s11116-014-9547-0

Cited by 109 publications

(72 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Based on consumer choice theory, travelers are assumed to rationally choose a transport mode to travel from their origins to their destinations by evaluating the characteristics of various available competing alternatives, and weighing their options in an attempt to maximize personal utility [4,37,38]. Individuals' transport mode choices and travel behaviors are affected by a complex set of factors, such as availability, travel costs, personal attitudes, personal demographics, habits, perceptions of safety and convenience, cultures, and built environments [39][40][41][42][43][44]. Ridesharing provides a more flexible, more convenient, and often faster option than public transit [14], and a lower cost than private cars (ridesharing riders could share some costs with drivers, and riders do not need to pay for ownership) [3].…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining the Relationship between Household Vehicle Ownership and Ridesharing Behaviors in the United States

Zhang

2018

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To improve the sustainability and efficiency of transport systems, communities and government agencies throughout the United States (US) are looking for ways to reduce vehicle ownership and single-occupant trips by encouraging people to shift from driving to using more sustainable transport modes (such as ridesharing). Ridesharing is a cost-effective, sustainable and effective alternative transportation mode that is beneficial to the environment, the economy and society. Despite the potential effect of vehicle ownership on the adoption of ridesharing services, individuals’ ridesharing behaviors and the interdependencies between vehicle ownership and ridesharing usage are not well understood. This study aims to fill the gap by examining the associations between household vehicle ownership and the frequency and probability of ridesharing usage, and to estimate the effects of household vehicle ownership on individuals’ ridesharing usage in the US. We conducted zero-inflated negative binomial regression models using data from the 2017 National Household Travel Survey. The results show that, in general, one-vehicle reduction in households was significantly associated with a 7.9% increase in the frequency of ridesharing usage and a 23.0% increase in the probability of ridesharing usage. The effects of household vehicle ownership on the frequency of ridesharing usage are greater for those who live in areas with a higher population density than those living in areas with a lower population density. Young people, men, those who are unable to drive, individuals with high household income levels, and those who live in areas with rail service or a higher population density, tend to use ridesharing more frequently and are more likely to use it. These findings can be used as guides for planners or practitioners to better understand individuals’ ridesharing behaviors, and to identify policies and interventions to increase the potential of ridesharing usage, and to decrease household vehicle ownership, depending on different contextual features and demographic variables. Comprehensive strategies that limit vehicle ownership and address the increasing demand for ridesharing have the potential to improve the sustainability of transportation systems.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining the Relationship between Household Vehicle Ownership and Ridesharing Behaviors in the United States

Zhang

2018

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In cities across the United States, poorer individuals disproportionately utilize public transportation (Pucher and Renne 2003;Taylor and Morris 2015). This is particularly true of public transportation users in LA County (Streeter and Bernstein 2003).…”

Section: Additional Specificationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Urban Transport and Crime: Evidence From Unanticipated Mass Transit Strikes

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examine the effects of mass transit strikes on criminal behavior in Los Angeles County utilizing a unique dataset of reported crimes between 2000 and 2007. Geocoded location and time information pertaining to each offense accommodates a fine grained difference‐in‐differences panel data analysis. We find that in locations affected by the strike, aggravated assaults rose by 18.7% while aggregate property crimes increased by 5.7%, relative to their mean. This increase in crime was disproportionately larger in lower income neighborhoods, which report higher usage of mass transit, suggesting local isolation of both criminals and victims as a mechanism. (JEL J52, K42, K31)

show abstract

“…Public transportation is variously charged with the missions of reducing traffic congestion, air pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions; of promoting economic revitalization and creating jobs; of reorganizing land use patterns and creating denser, more attractive urban environments; of providing mobility for those without it; and more (Taylor and Morris 2015). This is an ambitious agenda to be sure, and one with the rare ability to win support from environmentalists, labor unions, businesses, and even drivers.…”

Section: Transit In the 2000s: Where Does It Stand And Where Is It Hementioning

confidence: 99%

“…From 1985 to 2015, LA Metro ridership fell 25% per capita (National Transit Database 2017; U.S. Census Bureau 2016). This combination of rising supply and relatively flat ridership has made transit steadily less productive over time as people have been using it less per inflation-adjusted dollar spent on it (Taylor and Morris 2015). What explains these worrisome trends and what do they mean for transit's future?…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%