IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v92y2016icp43-58.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Commuters’ willingness-to-pay for improvement of transfer facilities in and around metro stations – A case study in Kolkata

Author

Listed:
  • Sadhukhan, Shubhajit
  • Banerjee, Uttam K.
  • Maitra, Bhargab

Abstract

Although several cities in India are developing the metro system, there are lacunas associated with transfer facilities in and around metro stations. The present work aims to investigate the perception of commuters of Kolkata city, India in terms of their willingness-to-pay (WTP) for improvement of transfer facilities. A stated preference survey instrument was designed to collect choice responses from metro commuters and the database was analysed by developing random parameter logit (RPL) models. The decomposition effects of various socioeconomic and trip characteristics on mean estimates were also investigated in random parameter logit models with heterogeneity. The work indicates significantly high WTP of metro commuters as compared to the average metro fare for improvement of various qualitative attributes of transfer facility such as ‘facility for level change’, ‘visual communication’, ‘pedestrian crossing’, and ‘pedestrian environment’. The WTP values are also found to vary across different groups of commuter formed on the basis of ‘trip purpose’, ‘monthly household income’, ‘station type’ and ‘metro fare’. ‘Work trip’ commuters are found to have higher WTP for improvement of access time, pedestrian environment and use of an escalator over the elevator. On the other hand, ‘high-income group’ commuters have shown higher WTP for improvement of access time, pedestrian crossing, and pedestrian environment. While ‘high fare group’ commuters have higher WTP for access time and pedestrian environment, heterogeneity is also observed in WTP for facility for level change, pedestrian crossing, and pedestrian environment across commuters using different ‘station type’ (underground, at-grade, and elevated). The findings from the study provide a basis for formulating policies for the improvement of transfer facilities in and around metro stations giving due attention to the preference of commuters having different socioeconomic and trip characteristics.

Suggested Citation

  • Sadhukhan, Shubhajit & Banerjee, Uttam K. & Maitra, Bhargab, 2016. "Commuters’ willingness-to-pay for improvement of transfer facilities in and around metro stations – A case study in Kolkata," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 43-58.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:92:y:2016:i:c:p:43-58
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tra.2016.07.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965856416306103
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tra.2016.07.004?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Loureiro, Maria L. & Dominguez Arcos, Fernando, 2012. "Applying Best–Worst Scaling in a stated preference analysis of forest management programs," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 381-394.
    2. Greene, William H. & Hensher, David A. & Rose, John, 2006. "Accounting for heterogeneity in the variance of unobserved effects in mixed logit models," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 75-92, January.
    3. Krygsman, Stephan & Dijst, Martin & Arentze, Theo, 2004. "Multimodal public transport: an analysis of travel time elements and the interconnectivity ratio," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 265-275, July.
    4. David Hensher & William Greene, 2003. "The Mixed Logit model: The state of practice," Transportation, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 133-176, May.
    5. Bhat, Chandra R., 2001. "Quasi-random maximum simulated likelihood estimation of the mixed multinomial logit model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 677-693, August.
    6. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, January.
    7. Bhat, Chandra R., 2003. "Simulation estimation of mixed discrete choice models using randomized and scrambled Halton sequences," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 837-855, November.
    8. Givoni, Moshe & Rietveld, Piet, 2007. "The access journey to the railway station and its role in passengers' satisfaction with rail travel," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(5), pages 357-365, September.
    9. Rose, John M. & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A. & Collins, Andrew T., 2008. "Designing efficient stated choice experiments in the presence of reference alternatives," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 395-406, May.
    10. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D. With contributions by-Name:Adamowicz,Wiktor, 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304.
    11. Cherchi, Elisabetta & Ortúzar, Juan de Dios, 2006. "On fitting mode specific constants in the presence of new options in RP/SP models," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 1-18, January.
    12. John Rose & Michiel Bliemer, 2013. "Sample size requirements for stated choice experiments," Transportation, Springer, vol. 40(5), pages 1021-1041, September.
    13. Lai, Wen-Tai & Chen, Ching-Fu, 2011. "Behavioral intentions of public transit passengers--The roles of service quality, perceived value, satisfaction and involvement," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 318-325, March.
    14. Denzil G. Fiebig & Michael P. Keane & Jordan Louviere & Nada Wasi, 2010. "The Generalized Multinomial Logit Model: Accounting for Scale and Coefficient Heterogeneity," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 393-421, 05-06.
    15. Hess, Stephane & Bierlaire, Michel & Polak, John W., 2005. "Estimation of value of travel-time savings using mixed logit models," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 39(2-3), pages 221-236.
    16. Hensher, David A. & Rose, John M., 2007. "Development of commuter and non-commuter mode choice models for the assessment of new public transport infrastructure projects: A case study," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 41(5), pages 428-443, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sadhukhan, Shubhajit & Banerjee, Uttam K. & Maitra, Bhargab, 2017. "Rationality of fare increment for improvement of transfer facilities at metro stations: An experience in Kolkata," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 31-38.
    2. Prasad, Prashant & Maitra, Bhargab, 2019. "Identifying areas of interventions for improvement of shared modes for school trips," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 122-135.
    3. Parmar, Janak & Saiyed, Gulnazbanu & Dave, Sanjaykumar, 2023. "Analysis of taste heterogeneity in commuters’ travel decisions using joint parking– and mode–choice model: A case from urban India," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    4. Bera, Reema & Maitra, Bhargab, 2021. "Assessing consumer preferences for Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle (PHEV): An Indian perspective," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    5. Kun Gao & Minhua Shao & Kay W. Axhausen & Lijun Sun & Huizhao Tu & Yihong Wang, 2022. "Inertia effects of past behavior in commuting modal shift behavior: interactions, variations and implications for demand estimation," Transportation, Springer, vol. 49(4), pages 1063-1097, August.
    6. Li, Haiying & Li, Xian & Xu, Xinyue & Liu, Jun & Ran, Bin, 2018. "Modeling departure time choice of metro passengers with a smart corrected mixed logit model - A case study in Beijing," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 106-121.
    7. Shubhendra Singh Parihar & Puneet Rai & Masood Siddiqui, 2021. "A Study of Commuter’s Shift Behaviour Towards New Age Convenient Transport Services," FIIB Business Review, , vol. 10(2), pages 172-180, June.
    8. Mallikarjun Patil & Bandhan Bandhu Majumdar & Prasanta Kumar Sahu & Long T. Truong, 2021. "Evaluation of Prospective Users’ Choice Decision toward Electric Two-Wheelers Using a Stated Preference Survey: An Indian Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-22, March.

    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. Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M., 2011. "Experimental design influences on stated choice outputs: An empirical study in air travel choice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 63-79, January.
    2. Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M., 2010. "Construction of experimental designs for mixed logit models allowing for correlation across choice observations," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 720-734, July.
    3. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    4. Stephane Hess, 2014. "Latent class structures: taste heterogeneity and beyond," Chapters, in: Stephane Hess & Andrew Daly (ed.), Handbook of Choice Modelling, chapter 14, pages 311-330, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Campbell, Danny & Hutchinson, W. George & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2006. "Using Discrete Choice Experiments to Derive Individual-Specific WTP Estimates for Landscape Improvements under Agri-Environmental Schemes: Evidence from the Rural Environment Protection Scheme in Irel," Sustainability Indicators and Environmental Valuation Working Papers 12220, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    6. Saxena, N. & Rashidi, T.H. & Dixit, V.V. & Waller, S.T., 2019. "Modelling the route choice behaviour under stop-&-go traffic for different car driver segments," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 62-72.
    7. Campbell, Danny & Hutchinson, W. George & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2006. "Lexicographic Preferences in Discrete Choice Experiments: Consequences on Individual-Specific Willingness to Pay Estimates," Sustainability Indicators and Environmental Valuation Working Papers 12224, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    8. Yang, Chih-Wen & Sung, Yen-Ching, 2010. "Constructing a mixed-logit model with market positioning to analyze the effects of new mode introduction," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 175-182.
    9. De Ayala Bilbao, Amaya & Hoyos Ramos, David & Mariel Chladkova, Petr, 2012. "Landscape valuation through discrete choice experiments: Current practice and future research reflections," BILTOKI 1134-8984, Universidad del País Vasco - Departamento de Economía Aplicada III (Econometría y Estadística).
    10. Junyi Shen & Yusuke Sakata & Yoshizo Hashimoto, 2006. "A Comparison between Latent Class Model and Mixed Logit Model for Transport Mode Choice: Evidences from Two Datasets of Japan," Discussion Papers in Economics and Business 06-05, Osaka University, Graduate School of Economics.
    11. Yu, Jie & Goos, Peter & Vandebroek, Martina, 2010. "Comparing different sampling schemes for approximating the integrals involved in the efficient design of stated choice experiments," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 44(10), pages 1268-1289, December.
    12. Train, Kenneth & Wilson, Wesley W., 2008. "Estimation on stated-preference experiments constructed from revealed-preference choices," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 191-203, March.
    13. Campbell, Danny, 2007. "Combining mixed logit models and random effects models to identify the determinants of willingness to pay for rural landscape improvements," 81st Annual Conference, April 2-4, 2007, Reading University, UK 7975, Agricultural Economics Society.
    14. Chalak, Ali & Al-Naghi, Hani & Irani, Alexandra & Abou-Zeid, Maya, 2016. "Commuters’ behavior towards upgraded bus services in Greater Beirut: Implications for greenhouse gas emissions, social welfare and transport policy," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 265-285.
    15. Danny Campbell & George Hutchinson & Riccardo Scarpa, 2006. "Using mixed logit models to derive individual-specific WTP estimates for landscape improvements under agri-environmental schemes: evidence from the Rural Environment Protection Scheme in Ireland," Working Papers 0607, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.
    16. Lew, Daniel K. & Wallmo, Kristy, 2017. "Temporal stability of stated preferences for endangered species protection from choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 87-97.
    17. Birolini, Sebastian & Malighetti, Paolo & Redondi, Renato & Deforza, Paolo, 2019. "Access mode choice to low-cost airports: Evaluation of new direct rail services at Milan-Bergamo airport," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 113-124.
    18. Sadhukhan, Shubhajit & Banerjee, Uttam K. & Maitra, Bhargab, 2017. "Rationality of fare increment for improvement of transfer facilities at metro stations: An experience in Kolkata," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 31-38.
    19. Zijlstra, Toon & Goos, Peter & Verhetsel, Ann, 2019. "A mixture-amount stated preference study on the mobility budget," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 230-246.
    20. Danny Campbell & George Hutchinson & Riccardo Scarpa, 2006. "Integrating landscape improvement indices and discrete choice experiments: evidence from the Rural Environment Protection Scheme in Ireland," Working Papers 0609, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.

    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:92:y:2016:i:c:p:43-58. 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: 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.