IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jotrge/v121y2024ics0966692324002370.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Equity and accessibility assessment of fixed route transit systems integrated with on-demand feeder services

Author

Listed:
  • Aravind, Avani
  • Venthuruthiyil, Suvin P.
  • Mishra, Sabyasachee

Abstract

In contemporary societies, public transportation holds paramount significance for fostering sustainable and equitable urban development. Concurrently, innovative mobility solutions, such as the integration of on-demand mobility services like Demand Response Transit (DRT) and Transportation Network Companies (TNC) with Fixed Route Transit (FRT) systems, are gaining prominence. On-demand mobility, with its adaptive dynamic routing, can improve public transit access by best utilizing the existing infrastructure. However, to ensure the adequacy of the service of an integrated system, it is essential to evaluate equity and accessibility of the system. While research has explored the adaptability of integrated multi-modal transport systems, a critical gap remains in understanding the impact on transportation accessibility, particularly for transit-reliant communities. This study utilizes spatial indicators to depict accessibility changes at FRT bus stops post-integration with on-demand services. To assess the enhancement in accessibility resulting from integration, the study employed an agent-based model, testing two scenarios: i) Walking with FRT and ii) On-demand Feeder with FRT (DRT and TNC integrated as feeders). The evaluation employs key metrics, including Transit Coverage Gap, the Lorenz curve, and the Gini index, to analyze the accessibility and equity of the integrated services. Additionally, a novel measure, termed the “Accessibility-Radius,” is proposed to quantify spatial accessibility to FRT services. Accessibility-Radius (AR) is defined as the radial service range of a public transit stop, which captures the dependence of the users of the FRT stop to access the public transit facilities. In this study, we quantified the AR as the 90th and 95th percentile distances between various origins and the nearest FRT stops of completed trips. The results of a case study of the city of Morristown, Tennessee, US, indicate that after integration, the Gini index improved from 0.88 to 0.71, and 29.6 % more people had access to public transportation. The study also utilizes the AR performance metric to evaluate a recently developed transit integration project in Memphis, Tennessee, US. The results demonstrate a remarkable 224 % improvement in transit coverage Gap at an FRT stop. Therefore the contribution of this study is a framework to evaluate the accessibility and equity enhancement for a public transit system after integrating with on-demand feeder services.

Suggested Citation

  • Aravind, Avani & Venthuruthiyil, Suvin P. & Mishra, Sabyasachee, 2024. "Equity and accessibility assessment of fixed route transit systems integrated with on-demand feeder services," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jotrge:v:121:y:2024:i:c:s0966692324002370
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2024.104028
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0966692324002370
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2024.104028?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Welch, Timothy F. & Mishra, Sabyasachee, 2013. "A measure of equity for public transit connectivity," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 29-41.
    2. Shaheen, Susan PhD & Martin, Elliot PhD & Hoffman-Stapleton, Mikaela, 2019. "Shared mobility and urban form impacts: a case study of peer-to-peer (P2P) carsharing in the US," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt34z556p2, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    3. Kevin Manaugh & Ahmed El- Geneidy, 2012. "Who benefits from new transportation infrastructure? Using accessibility measures to evaluate social equity in public transport provision," Chapters, in: Karst T. Geurs & Kevin J. Krizek & Aura Reggiani (ed.), Accessibility Analysis and Transport Planning, chapter 12, pages 211-227, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Calabrò, Giovanni & Araldo, Andrea & Oh, Simon & Seshadri, Ravi & Inturri, Giuseppe & Ben-Akiva, Moshe, 2023. "Adaptive transit design: Optimizing fixed and demand responsive multi-modal transportation via continuous approximation," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    5. Currie, Graham, 2010. "Quantifying spatial gaps in public transport supply based on social needs," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 31-41.
    6. Daniel J. Fagnant & Kara M. Kockelman, 2018. "Dynamic ride-sharing and fleet sizing for a system of shared autonomous vehicles in Austin, Texas," Transportation, Springer, vol. 45(1), pages 143-158, January.
    7. Fayyaz, S. Kiavash & Liu, Xiaoyue Cathy & Porter, Richard J., 2017. "Dynamic transit accessibility and transit gap causality analysis," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 27-39.
    8. Sultana, Zohora & Mishra, Sabyasachee & Cherry, Christopher R. & Golias, Mihalis M. & Tabrizizadeh Jeffers, Saman, 2018. "Modeling frequency of rural demand response transit trips," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 494-505.
    9. Floridea Di Ciommo & Yoram Shiftan, 2017. "Transport equity analysis," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(2), pages 139-151, March.
    10. Tarduno, Matthew, 2021. "The congestion costs of Uber and Lyft," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    11. Jomehpour Chahar Aman, Javad & Smith-Colin, Janille, 2020. "Transit Deserts: Equity analysis of public transit accessibility," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    12. Carleton, Phillip R. & Porter, J. David, 2018. "A comparative analysis of the challenges in measuring transit equity: definitions, interpretations, and limitations," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 64-75.
    13. Yan, Xiang & Zhao, Xilei & Han, Yuan & Hentenryck, Pascal Van & Dillahunt, Tawanna, 2021. "Mobility-on-demand versus fixed-route transit systems: An evaluation of traveler preferences in low-income communities," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 481-495.
    14. Kaplan, Sigal & Popoks, Dmitrijs & Prato, Carlo Giacomo & Ceder, Avishai (Avi), 2014. "Using connectivity for measuring equity in transit provision," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 82-92.
    15. Chung, Yi-Shih & Chiou, Yu-Chiun, 2017. "Willingness-to-pay for a bus fare reform: A contingent valuation approach with multiple bound dichotomous choices," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 289-304.
    16. Giovanni Calabro' & Andrea Araldo & Simon Oh & Ravi Seshadri & Giuseppe Inturri & Moshe Ben-Akiva, 2021. "Adaptive Transit Design: Optimizing Fixed and Demand Responsive Multi-Modal Transportation via Continuous Approximation," Papers 2112.14748, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2023.
    17. Ricciardi, Anthony Michael & Xia, Jianhong(Cecilia) & Currie, Graham, 2015. "Exploring public transport equity between separate disadvantaged cohorts: a case study in Perth, Australia," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 111-122.
    18. Ibarra-Rojas, O.J. & Delgado, F. & Giesen, R. & Muñoz, J.C., 2015. "Planning, operation, and control of bus transport systems: A literature review," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 38-75.
    19. Stepniak, Marcin & Rosik, Piotr, 2013. "Accessibility improvement, territorial cohesion and spillovers: a multidimensional evaluation of two motorway sections in Poland," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 154-163.
    20. Delbosc, Alexa & Currie, Graham, 2011. "Using Lorenz curves to assess public transport equity," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 19(6), pages 1252-1259.
    21. Shaheen, Susan & Cohen, Adam, 2020. "Chapter 3 - Mobility on demand (MOD) and mobility as a service (MaaS): early understanding of shared mobility impacts and public transit partnerships," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt5030f0cd, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    22. Sharma, Ishant & Mishra, Sabyasachee & Golias, Mihalis M. & Welch, Timothy F. & Cherry, Christopher R., 2020. "Equity of transit connectivity in Tennessee cities," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    23. Aldaihani, Majid M. & Quadrifoglio, Luca & Dessouky, Maged M. & Hall, Randolph, 2004. "Network design for a grid hybrid transit service," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 511-530, August.
    24. Mulley, Corinne & Ho, Chinh & Ho, Loan & Hensher, David & Rose, John, 2018. "Will bus travellers walk further for a more frequent service? An international study using a stated preference approach," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 88-97.
    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. Jomehpour Chahar Aman, Javad & Smith-Colin, Janille, 2020. "Transit Deserts: Equity analysis of public transit accessibility," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    2. Sharma, Ishant & Mishra, Sabyasachee & Golias, Mihalis M. & Welch, Timothy F. & Cherry, Christopher R., 2020. "Equity of transit connectivity in Tennessee cities," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    3. Hussain, Etikaf & Bhaskar, Ashish & Chung, Edward, 2021. "A novel origin destination based transit supply index: Exploiting the opportunities with big transit data," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    4. Xia, Jianhong(Cecilia) & Nesbitt, Joshua & Daley, Rebekah & Najnin, Arfanara & Litman, Todd & Tiwari, Surya Prasad, 2016. "A multi-dimensional view of transport-related social exclusion: A comparative study of Greater Perth and Sydney," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 205-221.
    5. Sharma, Gajanand & Patil, Gopal R., 2021. "Public transit accessibility approach to understand the equity for public healthcare services: A case study of Greater Mumbai," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    6. Carleton, Phillip R. & Porter, J. David, 2018. "A comparative analysis of the challenges in measuring transit equity: definitions, interpretations, and limitations," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 64-75.
    7. Liu, Chengliang & Duan, Dezhong, 2020. "Spatial inequality of bus transit dependence on urban streets and its relationships with socioeconomic intensities: A tale of two megacities in China," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    8. Chen, Zhiwei & Guo, Yujie & Stuart, Amy L. & Zhang, Yu & Li, Xiaopeng, 2019. "Exploring the equity performance of bike-sharing systems with disaggregated data: A story of southern Tampa," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 529-545.
    9. Barajas, Jesus M. & Brown, Anne, 2021. "Not minding the gap: Does ride-hailing serve transit deserts?," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    10. repec:osf:socarx:y4jwk_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Wang, Bangjuan & Liu, Chengliang & Zhang, Hong, 2022. "Where are equity and service effectiveness? A tale from public transport in Shanghai," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    12. Ben-Elia, Eran & Benenson, Itzhak, 2019. "A spatially-explicit method for analyzing the equity of transit commuters' accessibility," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 31-42.
    13. Xiaoshu Cao & Huiling Chen & Feiwen Liang & Wulin Wang, 2018. "Measurement and Spatial Differentiation Characteristics of Transit Equity: A Case Study of Guangzhou, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-17, April.
    14. Camporeale, Rosalia & Caggiani, Leonardo & Ottomanelli, Michele, 2019. "Modeling horizontal and vertical equity in the public transport design problem: A case study," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 184-206.
    15. Weckström, Christoffer & Kujala, Rainer & Mladenović, Miloš N. & Saramäki, Jari, 2019. "Assessment of large-scale transitions in public transport networks using open timetable data: case of Helsinki metro extension," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 1-1.
    16. Ricciardi, Anthony Michael & Xia, Jianhong(Cecilia) & Currie, Graham, 2015. "Exploring public transport equity between separate disadvantaged cohorts: a case study in Perth, Australia," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 111-122.
    17. Song, Yena & Kim, Hyun & Lee, Keumsook & Ahn, Kwangwon, 2018. "Subway network expansion and transit equity: A case study of Gwangju metropolitan area, South Korea," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 148-158.
    18. Rich, Jeppe & Seshadri, Ravi & Jomeh, Ali Jamal & Clausen, Sofus Rasmus, 2023. "Fixed routing or demand-responsive? Agent-based modelling of autonomous first and last mile services in light-rail systems," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    19. Jafino, Bramka Arga, 2021. "An equity-based transport network criticality analysis," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 204-221.
    20. Mariano Gallo & Mario Marinelli, 2020. "Sustainable Mobility: A Review of Possible Actions and Policies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-39, September.
    21. Lope, Dinah Jane & Dolgun, Anil, 2020. "Measuring the inequality of accessible trams in Melbourne," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).

    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:eee:jotrge:v:121:y:2024:i:c:s0966692324002370. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-transport-geography .

    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.