IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating alternative concepts of bus-based park and ride


  • Meek, Stuart
  • Ison, Stephen
  • Enoch, Marcus


Whilst it has been used since the 1960s, the UK government have promoted bus-based Park and Ride (P&R) particularly heavily over the last 20 years as a tool to deal with traffic congestion and air pollution. There has long since been a view however that P&R in its current guise may actually be exacerbating the problems of traffic congestion, fuel use and emissions instead of mitigating them. This paper aims to reconsider this proposition whilst also testing a range of alternative forms of car-bus interchange in the context of traffic reduction, drawing on evidence from a large survey of P&R users in Cambridge, UK. Overall the results suggest that while current P&R significantly increases the vehicle miles travelled by its users, some of the alternative models presented potentially offer considerable improvements.

Suggested Citation

  • Meek, Stuart & Ison, Stephen & Enoch, Marcus, 2011. "Evaluating alternative concepts of bus-based park and ride," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 456-467, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:18:y:2011:i:2:p:456-467

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Parkhurst, Graham, 1995. "Park and ride: Could it lead to an increase in car traffic?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 15-23, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Mingardo, Giuliano & van Wee, Bert & Rye, Tom, 2015. "Urban parking policy in Europe: A conceptualization of past and possible future trends," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 268-281.
    2. Yusuke Kono & Kenetsu Uchida & Katia Andrade, 2014. "Economical welfare maximisation analysis: assessing the use of existing Park-and-Ride services," Transportation, Springer, vol. 41(4), pages 839-854, July.
    3. Zhong, Haotian & Li, Wei, 2016. "Rail transit investment and property values: An old tale retold," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 33-48.


    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:trapol:v:18:y:2011:i:2:p:456-467. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.