Developing new urban public transport systems : An irrational decision-making process
AbstractThe decision-making process for planning new urban public transport systems in the UK is examined by studying 11 new and planned systems. The objectives of building the systems relate to transport and development issues. A number of key factors are taken into account during the decision-making process: forecast demand, image, deregulation of buses, technological innovation, private sector involvement and the funding mechanism. The requirement for proven technology and the forecast demand for the systems reduces the choice to one of light rail or bus. The effects of bus deregulation, funding and image, essentially reduce that choice to light rail or nothing. Cost should be kept low, which suggests a bus based system, but current legislation favours more expensive light rail systems. The conclusion is that although transport planners make rational decisions within the current political framework, the framework, and therefore some of the decisions, are not rational.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Elsevier in its journal Transport Policy.
Volume (Year): 3 (1996)
Issue (Month): 4 (October)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/30473/description#description
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Hill, Rosalie, 1995. "The Toulouse Metro and the South Yorkshire Supertram: a cross cultural comparison of light rapid transit developments in France and England," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 203-216, July.
- Wachs, Martin, 1993. "Learning from Los Angeles: Transport, Urban Form, and Air Quality," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt2wv0h7rq, University of California Transportation Center.
- David Hensher & Thomas Golob, 2008. "Bus rapid transit systems: a comparative assessment," Transportation, Springer, vol. 35(4), pages 501-518, July.
- De Bruijn, Hans & Veeneman, Wijnand, 2009. "Decision-making for light rail," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 349-359, May.
- Galit Cohen-Blankshtain & Eran Feitelson, 2011. "Light rail routing: do goals matter?," Transportation, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 343-361, March.
- Bradley Lane, 2011. "TAZ-level variation in work trip mode choice between 1990 and 2000 and the presence of rail transit," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 147-171, June.
- Lane, Bradley W., 2008. "Significant characteristics of the urban rail renaissance in the United States: A discriminant analysis," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 279-295, February.
- Cledan Mandri-Perrott & Iain Menzies, 2010. "Private Sector Participation in Light Rail-Light Metro Transit Initiatives," World Bank Publications, The World Bank, number 2416, March.
- G. Currie & A. Ahern & A. Delbosc, 2011. "Exploring the drivers of light rail ridership: an empirical route level analysis of selected Australian, North American and European systems," Transportation, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 545-560, May.
- Mackett, Roger L. & Edwards, Marion, 1998. "The impact of new urban public transport systems: will the expectations be met?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 231-245, May.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.