IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do Economists Reach a Conclusion On Rail Transit?


  • Ted Balaker
  • Cecilia Joung Kim


In the United States, the public debate over urban rail projects is complicated by the lack of agreement on goals. Supporters offer a wide variety of justifications to build and expand rail transit. If one focuses on the judgments of economists, the list of justifications shrinks considerably, but we are still left with a bundle of goals. Compared to other justifications, economists appear to be somewhat optimistic about rail transit’s impact on local economic development, but less optimistic about rail’s ability to achieve environmental improvement and serve the transit-dependent poor. Economists seem quite pessimistic about rail’s ability to achieve key transportation goals like reducing congestion. Economists often attribute rail’s political success to rent-seeking and romantic political factors. Of those economists who offer a big-picture view, there appears to be wide, though not unanimous, agreement that rail’s costs exceed its benefits. And it seems that almost all economists who write about rail agree that various demographic features, such as suburbanization, the declining influence of central business districts, and increasing wealth will make it increasingly difficult to design successful rail systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Ted Balaker & Cecilia Joung Kim, 2006. "Do Economists Reach a Conclusion On Rail Transit?," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 3(3), pages 551-602, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:ejw:journl:v:3:y:2006:i:3:p:551-602

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Jonathan Richmond, 2001. "A whole-system approach to evaluating urban transit investments," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(2), pages 141-179.
    2. Glaeser, Edward L. & Kahn, Matthew E., 2004. "Sprawl and urban growth," Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, in: J. V. Henderson & J. F. Thisse (ed.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 56, pages 2481-2527, Elsevier.
    3. Adrian T. Moore & Ted Balaker, 2006. "Do Economists Reach a Conclusion on Taxi Deregulation?," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 3(1), pages 109-132, January.
    4. Kain, John F, 1992. "The Use of Straw Men in the Economic Evaluation of Rail Transport Projects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(2), pages 487-493, May.
    5. Richard Voith, 1991. "Transportation, Sorting and House Values," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 19(2), pages 117-137, June.
    6. Nelson, Peter & Baglino, Andrew & Harrington, Winston & Safirova, Elena & Lipman, Abram, 2007. "Transit in Washington, DC: Current benefits and optimal level of provision," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 231-251, September.
    7. Winston, Clifford & Maheshri, Vikram, 2007. "On the social desirability of urban rail transit systems," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 362-382, September.
    8. Klein, Daniel, 2004. "The People’s Romance: Why People Love Government (as much as they do)," Ratio Working Papers 31, The Ratio Institute, revised 11 May 2005.
    9. Giuliano, Genevieve & Small, Kenneth A., 1995. "Alternative Strategies for Coping with Traffic Congestion," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt8nw1480v, University of California Transportation Center.
    10. Adam M. Zaretsky, 1994. "Riding the rails: a look at light rail transit," The Regional Economist, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, issue Oct, pages 4-9.
    11. Fielding, Gordon J., 1995. "Congestion Pricing and the Future of Transit," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt0g332530, University of California Transportation Center.
    12. Kain, John F. & Liu, Zvi, 1999. "Secrets of success: assessing the large increases in transit ridership achieved by Houston and San Diego transit providers," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 33(7-8), pages 601-624.
    13. Bowes, David R. & Ihlanfeldt, Keith R., 2001. "Identifying the Impacts of Rail Transit Stations on Residential Property Values," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 1-25, July.
    14. McFadden, Daniel, 1974. "The measurement of urban travel demand," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 303-328, November.
    15. John F. Kain, 1996. "Cost-Effective Alternatives to Atlanta's Costly Rail Rapid Transit System," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1762, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
    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. Alonso, Borja & Barreda, Rosa & dell’Olio, Luigi & Ibeas, Angel, 2018. "Modelling user perception of taxi service quality," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 157-164.
    2. Long, Jiancheng & Szeto, W.Y. & Du, Jie & Wong, R.C.P., 2017. "A dynamic taxi traffic assignment model: A two-level continuum transportation system approach," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 222-254.
    3. Shaheen, Susan PhD & Cano, Lauren & Camel, Madonna, 2015. "Exploring Electric Vehicle Carsharing As A Mobility Option for Older Adults:A Case Study of A Senior Adult Community in The San Francisco Bay Area," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt0cz5s74s, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    4. Daniel B. Klein & Charlotta Stern, 2007. "Is There a Free‐Market Economist in the House? The Policy Views of American Economic Association Members," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(2), pages 309-334, April.
    5. Peter Abelson, 2010. "The High Cost of Taxi Regulation, with Special Reference to Sydney," Agenda - A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform, Australian National University, College of Business and Economics, School of Economics, vol. 17(2), pages 41-72.
    6. Salanova Grau, Josep Maria & Estrada, Miquel, 2019. "Social optimal shifts and fares for the Barcelona taxi sector," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 111-122.
    7. Cetin, Tamer & Deakin, Elizabeth, 2019. "Regulation of taxis and the rise of ridesharing," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 149-158.
    8. Li, Baicheng & Szeto, W.Y., 2019. "Taxi service area design: Formulation and analysis," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 308-333.
    9. Aarhaug, Jørgen & Olsen, Silvia, 2018. "Implications of ride-sourcing and self-driving vehicles on the need for regulation in unscheduled passenger transport," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 573-582.
    10. Wong, R.C.P. & Szeto, W.Y., 2018. "An alternative methodology for evaluating the service quality of urban taxis," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 132-140.

    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. Shen, Qing & Chen, Peng & Pan, Haixiao, 2016. "Factors affecting car ownership and mode choice in rail transit-supported suburbs of a large Chinese city," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 31-44.
    2. Siman Tang & Hong Lo, 2010. "On the financial viability of mass transit development: the case of Hong Kong," Transportation, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 299-316, March.
    3. Beaudoin, Justin & Lin Lawell, C.-Y. Cynthia, 2018. "The effects of public transit supply on the demand for automobile travel," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 447-467.
    4. Garcia-López, Miquel-Àngel & Hémet, Camille & Viladecans-Marsal, Elisabet, 2017. "Next train to the polycentric city: The effect of railroads on subcenter formation," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 50-63.
    5. De Groot, Henri L.F. & Ossokina, Ioulia V. & Teulings, Coen N, 2014. "Welfare Benefits of Agglomeration and Worker Heterogeneity," CEPR Discussion Papers 10216, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. Fesselmeyer, Eric & Liu, Haoming, 2016. "How Do Users Value a Network Expansion? Evidence from the Public Transit System in Singapore," IZA Discussion Papers 10142, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Ian W. H. Parry & Kenneth A. Small, 2009. "Should Urban Transit Subsidies Be Reduced?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(3), pages 700-724, June.
    8. Arthur Grimes & Chris Young, 2010. "Anticipatory Effects of Rail Upgrades: Auckland’s Western Line," Working Papers 10_11, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
    9. Deyas, Gebeyew T. & Woldeamanuel, Mintesnot G., 2020. "Social and economic impacts of public transportation on adjacent communities: The case of the Addis Ababa light rail transit," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    10. Teulings, Coen & Ossokina, Ioulia V. & de Groot, Henri L.F., 2014. "Welfare Benefits of Agglomeration and Worker Heterogeneity," IZA Discussion Papers 8382, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Jenny Schuetz, 2015. "Do rail transit stations encourage neighbourhood retail activity?," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 52(14), pages 2699-2723, November.
    12. Heilmann, Kilian, 2018. "Transit access and neighborhood segregation. Evidence from the Dallas light rail system," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 237-250.
    13. Joseph DeSalvo & Sisinnio Concas, 2013. "The Effect of Density and Trip-Chaining on the Interaction between Urban Form and Transit Demand," Working Papers 0413, University of South Florida, Department of Economics.
    14. Adler, Martin W. & van Ommeren, Jos N., 2016. "Does public transit reduce car travel externalities? Quasi-natural experiments' evidence from transit strikes," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 106-119.
    15. Luca D’Acci, 2014. "Monetary, Subjective and Quantitative Approaches to Assess Urban Quality of Life and Pleasantness in Cities (Hedonic Price, Willingness-to-Pay, Positional Value, Life Satisfaction, Isobenefit Lines)," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 115(2), pages 531-559, January.
    16. Martin W. Adler & Federica Liberini & Antonio Russo & Jos N. van Ommeren, 2019. "The Congestion Relief Benefit of Public Transit: Evidence from Rome," CESifo Working Paper Series 7698, CESifo.
    17. Aliyu Ahmad Aliyu & Olurotimi Adebowale Kemiki & Muhammad Umar Bello, 2018. "Transportation Accessibility Benefit and the Dynamic Pattern of Real Estate Prices: Emerging Literature," Traektoriâ Nauki = Path of Science, Altezoro, s.r.o. & Dialog, vol. 4(11), pages 1001-1016, November.
    18. Mohammad, Sara I. & Graham, Daniel J. & Melo, Patricia C. & Anderson, Richard J., 2013. "A meta-analysis of the impact of rail projects on land and property values," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 158-170.
    19. Ghebreegziabiher Debrezion & Eric Pels & Piet Rietveld, 2007. "The Impact of Railway Stations on Residential and Commercial Property Value: A Meta-analysis," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 161-180, August.
    20. Genevieve Giuliano & Jenny Schuetz & Eun Jin Shin, 2016. "Does Zoning Help or Hinder Transit-Oriented (Re)Development?," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2016-020, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).

    More about this item


    rail transit; transportation; economists;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • R4 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Transportation Economics
    • D73 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Bureaucracy; Administrative Processes in Public Organizations; Corruption
    • B0 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - General


    Access and download statistics


    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:ejw:journl:v:3:y:2006:i:3:p:551-602. 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: (Jason Briggeman). 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.