IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v214y2026ics096585642600385x.html

Fare evasion strategies, perceived safety, and travel choices in public transport: evidence from a vignette experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Barabino, Benedetto
  • Carra, Martina
  • Celse, Jérémy
  • Ventura, Roberto

Abstract

Fare evasion poses persistent challenges for public transport systems, with implications for financial sustainability, social norms, corporate image, and perceived safety and security. While deterrence strategies such as increasing inspection frequency or fine severity are widely used, their effects on passengers’ perceptions and behavioural spillovers remain weakly evidenced. This study examines how anti–fare evasion cues influence travel preferences, perceived safety and security, and fare‐evasion intentions, accounting for time of day and competition from a ride‑sharing service (RSS). Four research questions were examined through a vignette‑based randomised experiment. Participants chose among a non‑manipulated bus route, a manipulated route (enforcement or service cue), and an RSS alternative across seven conditions crossing enforcement cues (inspection, fines, neutral) and period (day/night). The results showed that the effects of anti–fare evasion cues were small and statistically uncertain. Neither inspections nor fines produced clear improvements in perceived safety or security (RQ1), and the enforcement type showed no consistent direct effect on the choice of the manipulated route (RQ2). Night-time conditions did not meaningfully change safety or risk perceptions, nor did they reliably moderate the association between perceived route safety and route choice (RQ3). Fare evasion was more frequent at night and less frequent on the manipulated route yet contrasts between Fine and Inspection treatments remained small and imprecisely estimated (RQ4). The RSS garnered only 3.73% choices amid price differentials. Thus, deterrence failed to bolster reassurance or ridership proxies, with choices driven by safety and security perceptions independently of cues. Night primarily led to increased evasion without corresponding gains in safety and security. Policies should pair targeted enforcement with service enhancements, particularly nocturnal, in multimodal contexts.

Suggested Citation

  • Barabino, Benedetto & Carra, Martina & Celse, Jérémy & Ventura, Roberto, 2026. "Fare evasion strategies, perceived safety, and travel choices in public transport: evidence from a vignette experiment," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 214(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:214:y:2026:i:c:s096585642600385x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2026.105244
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S096585642600385X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tra.2026.105244?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • R41 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Transportation Economics - - - Transportation: Demand, Supply, and Congestion; Travel Time; Safety and Accidents; Transportation Noise
    • K42 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Illegal Behavior and the Enforcement of Law
    • R48 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Transportation Economics - - - Government Pricing and Policy
    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior

    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:eee:transa:v:214:y:2026:i:c:s096585642600385x. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description .

    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.