IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2205.11858.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Incentive-compatible public transportation fares with random inspection

Author

Listed:
  • In'acio B'o
  • Chiu Yu Ko

Abstract

We consider the problem of designing prices for public transport where payment enforcing is done through random inspection of passengers' tickets as opposed to physically blocking their access. Passengers are fully strategic such that they may choose different routes or buy partial tickets in their optimizing decision. We derive expressions for the prices that make every passenger choose to buy the full ticket. Using travel and pricing data from the Washington DC metro, we show that a switch to a random inspection method for ticketing while keeping current prices could lead to more than 59% of revenue loss due to fare evasion, while adjusting prices to take incentives into consideration would reduce that loss to less than 20%, without any increase in prices.

Suggested Citation

  • In'acio B'o & Chiu Yu Ko, 2022. "Incentive-compatible public transportation fares with random inspection," Papers 2205.11858, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2205.11858
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2205.11858
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gary S. Becker, 1974. "Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach," NBER Chapters, in: Essays in the Economics of Crime and Punishment, pages 1-54, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Raymond Fisman & Edward Miguel, 2007. "Corruption, Norms, and Legal Enforcement: Evidence from Diplomatic Parking Tickets," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 115(6), pages 1020-1048, December.
    3. Yaniv, Gideon, 2009. "Shoplifting, monitoring and price determination," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 608-610, August.
    4. Ramnath K. Chellappa & Shivendu Shivendu, 2005. "Managing Piracy: Pricing and Sampling Strategies for Digital Experience Goods in Vertically Segmented Markets," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 16(4), pages 400-417, December.
    5. Joel Slemrod, 2007. "Cheating Ourselves: The Economics of Tax Evasion," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 21(1), pages 25-48, Winter.
    6. SCHMEIDLER, David, 1973. "Equilibrium points of nonatomic games," LIDAM Reprints CORE 146, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    7. Polinsky, Mitchell & Shavell, Steven, 1979. "The Optimal Tradeoff between the Probability and Magnitude of Fines," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(5), pages 880-891, December.
    8. Y Perlman & Y Ozinci, 2014. "Reducing shoplifting by investment in security," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 65(5), pages 685-693, May.
    9. José Correa & Tobias Harks & Vincent J. C. Kreuzen & Jannik Matuschke, 2017. "Fare Evasion in Transit Networks," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(1), pages 165-183, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stefan Buehler & Daniel Halbheer & Michael Lechner, 2017. "Payment Evasion," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(4), pages 804-832, December.
    2. Boyd, Colin, 2020. "Revisiting the foundations of fare evasion research," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 313-324.
    3. Matthew D. Rablen, 2014. "Audit Probability versus Effectiveness: The Beckerian Approach Revisited," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 16(2), pages 322-342, April.
    4. Gibson, Matthew, 2021. "Employer Market Power in Silicon Valley," IZA Discussion Papers 14843, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    5. Antonio Acconcia & Marcello D'Amato & Riccardo Martina, 2003. "Corruption and Tax Evasion with Competitive Bribes," CSEF Working Papers 112, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy.
    6. Dwenger, Nadja & Kleven, Henrik & Rasul, Imran & Rincke, Johannes, 2014. "Extrinsic vs Intrinsic Motivations for Tax Compliance. Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment in Germany," VfS Annual Conference 2014 (Hamburg): Evidence-based Economic Policy 100389, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    7. Menusch Khadjavi, 2018. "Deterrence works for criminals," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 165-178, August.
    8. Ahlin, Christian & Kim, In Kyung & Kim, Kyoo il, 2021. "Who commits fraud? evidence from korean gas stations," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    9. Jan Eeckhout & Nicola Persico & Petra E. Todd, 2010. "A Theory of Optimal Random Crackdowns," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(3), pages 1104-1135, June.
    10. Ernesto Dal Bó & Marko Terviö, 2013. "Self-Esteem, Moral Capital, And Wrongdoing," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 11(3), pages 599-663, June.
    11. Jan Boone & Peter Fredriksson & Bertil Holmlund & Jan C. van Ours, 2007. "Optimal Unemployment Insurance with Monitoring and Sanctions," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 117(518), pages 399-421, March.
    12. Ezra Friedman & Abraham L. Wickelgren, 2006. "Bayesian Juries and The Limits to Deterrence," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 22(1), pages 70-86, April.
    13. Henrik Jacobsen Kleven & Claus Thustrup Kreiner & Emmanuel Saez, 2016. "Why Can Modern Governments Tax So Much? An Agency Model of Firms as Fiscal Intermediaries," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 83(330), pages 219-246, April.
    14. Giulia Mascagni, 2018. "From The Lab To The Field: A Review Of Tax Experiments," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(2), pages 273-301, April.
    15. Carmen Arguedas, 2008. "To Comply or Not To Comply? Pollution Standard Setting Under Costly Monitoring and Sanctioning," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 41(2), pages 155-168, October.
    16. Riedel, Nadine & Schildberg-Hörisch, Hannah, 2013. "Asymmetric obligations," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 67-80.
    17. Emeric Henry & Nicolas Jacquemet & Roberto Galbiati, 2017. "Spillovers, Persistence and Learning: Institutions and the Dynamics of Cooperation," SciencePo Working papers Main halshs-01613850, HAL.
    18. Michèle Belot & Marina Schröder, 2016. "The Spillover Effects of Monitoring: A Field Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(1), pages 37-45, January.
    19. Kantorowicz-Reznichenko Elena, 2015. "Day-Fines: Should the Rich Pay More?," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 11(3), pages 481-501, November.
    20. David M. Kemme & Bhavik Parikh & Tanja Steigner, 2017. "Tax Havens, Tax Evasion and Tax Information Exchange Agreements in the OECD," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 23(3), pages 519-542, June.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2205.11858. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.