IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sot/journl/y2006i32p26-48.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impact and effectivity of ‘Free’ Public Transport measures: lessons from the case study of Brussels

Author

Listed:
  • Macharis, Cathy
  • De Witte, Astrid
  • Steenberghen, Therese
  • Van de Walle, Stefaan
  • Lannoy, Pierre
  • Polain, Celine

Abstract

The objective of the paper is to examine and to assess the effects of the introduction of a third payer system on the mobility behaviour from a multidisciplinary viewpoint. This approach allows an analysis of various effects that free public transport and, in general, price policies can entail. The concept of the ‘third payer system’ implies that the cost of public transport is not paid by the user or provider, but partially or completely by a third party. Local authorities, other public organisations and private organisations can enter into such agreements and pay for public transport for a specific target group in a specific area. The analysis has been performed through a case study, namely the introduction of free urban public transport for students at Dutch-speaking universities and colleges in Brussels. In how far this measure contributes to a more sustainable mobility system has caused much debate. Also, not everyone is convinced that such a measure is beneficial for the society. Some people argue that there are better ways to spend the money, for instance on the quality of public transport. In order to assess whether this measure has societal benefits, a social cost-benefit analysis (SCBA) has been carried out. This analysis calculates the benefits and costs of the measure, in order to find out if the balance is positive or negative.

Suggested Citation

  • Macharis, Cathy & De Witte, Astrid & Steenberghen, Therese & Van de Walle, Stefaan & Lannoy, Pierre & Polain, Celine, 2006. "Impact and effectivity of ‘Free’ Public Transport measures: lessons from the case study of Brussels," European Transport \ Trasporti Europei, ISTIEE, Institute for the Study of Transport within the European Economic Integration, issue 32, pages 26-48.
    • Handle: RePEc:sot:journl:y:2006:i:32:p:26-48
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10077/5893
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Proost, S. & Van Dender, K. & Courcelle, C. & De Borger, B. & Peirson, J. & Sharp, D. & Vickerman, R. & Gibbons, E. & O'Mahony, M. & Heaney, Q. & Van den Bergh, J. & Verhoef, E., 2002. "How large is the gap between present and efficient transport prices in Europe?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 41-57, January.
    2. Hine, J. & Scott, J., 2000. "Seamless, accessible travel: users' views of the public transport journey and interchange," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 217-226, July.
    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. Eoin O’Neill & Michael Brennan & Finbarr Brereton & Harutyun Shahumyan, 2015. "Exploring a spatial statistical approach to quantify flood risk perception using cognitive maps," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 76(3), pages 1573-1601, April.
    2. Oded Cats & Yusak O. Susilo & Triin Reimal, 2017. "The prospects of fare-free public transport: evidence from Tallinn," Transportation, Springer, vol. 44(5), pages 1083-1104, September.
    3. de Grange, Louis & Troncoso, Rodrigo & González, Felipe, 2012. "An empirical evaluation of the impact of three urban transportation policies on transit use," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 11-19.
    4. De Witte, Astrid & Macharis, Cathy & Mairesse, Olivier, 2008. "How persuasive is 'free' public transport?: A survey among commuters in the Brussels Capital Region," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 216-224, July.

    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. Lois, David & Monzón, Andrés & Hernández, Sara, 2018. "Analysis of satisfaction factors at urban transport interchanges: Measuring travellers’ attitudes to information, security and waiting," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 49-56.
    2. Dacko, Scott G. & Spalteholz, Carolin, 2014. "Upgrading the city: Enabling intermodal travel behaviour," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 222-235.
    3. Grotenhuis, Jan-Willem & Wiegmans, Bart W. & Rietveld, Piet, 2007. "The desired quality of integrated multimodal travel information in public transport: Customer needs for time and effort savings," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 27-38, January.
    4. de Oña, Juan & Estévez, Esperanza & de Oña, Rocío, 2021. "How does private vehicle users perceive the public transport service quality in large metropolitan areas? A European comparison," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 173-188.
    5. Hickman, Robin & Chen, Chia-Lin & Chow, Andy & Saxena, Sharad, 2015. "Improving interchanges in China: the experiential phenomenon," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 175-186.
    6. Palma, André de & Lindsey, Robin & Proost, Stef, 2006. "Research challenges in modelling urban road pricing: An overview," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 97-105, March.
    7. Buys, Laurie & Miller, Evonne, 2011. "Conceptualising convenience: Transportation practices and perceptions of inner-urban high density residents in Brisbane, Australia," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 289-297, January.
    8. Pérez-Martínez, P.J. & Vassallo-Magro, J.M., 2013. "Changes in the external costs of freight surface transport In Spain," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 61-76.
    9. Delucchi, Mark, 2007. "Do Motor-Vehicle Users in the US Pay Their Way?," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt5841z3kx, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    10. Martin Adler & Stefanie Peer & Tanja Sinozic, 2019. "Autonomous, Connected, Electric Shared vehicles (ACES) and public finance: an explorative analysis," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 19-005/VIII, Tinbergen Institute.
    11. Nocera, Silvio & Pungillo, Giuseppe & Bruzzone, Francesco, 2021. "How to evaluate and plan the freight-passengers first-last mile," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 56-66.
    12. Grazi, Fabio & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2008. "Spatial organization, transport, and climate change: Comparing instruments of spatial planning and policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(4), pages 630-639, November.
    13. Hennessy, Hugh & Tol, Richard S.J., 2011. "The impact of tax reform on new car purchases in Ireland," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(11), pages 7059-7067.
    14. Ilaria Delponte, 2021. "Institutional and Non-Institutional Governance Initiatives in Urban Transport Planning: The Paradigmatic Case of the Post-Collapse of the Morandi Bridge in Genoa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-18, May.
    15. Delucchi, Mark, 2007. "Do Motor-Vehicle Users in the US Pay Their Way?," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt2884w7km, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    16. Cruijssen, F. & Salomon, M., 2004. "Empirical Study : Order Sharing Between Transportation Companies may Result in Cost Reductions Between 5 to 15 Percent," Discussion Paper 2004-80, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    17. Schakenbos, Rik & Paix, Lissy La & Nijenstein, Sandra & Geurs, Karst T., 2016. "Valuation of a transfer in a multimodal public transport trip," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 72-81.
    18. Proost, Stef & Sen, Ahksaya, 2006. "Urban transport pricing reform with two levels of government: A case study of Brussels," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 127-139, March.
    19. Carlo Vittorio FIORIO & Massimo FLORIO & Giovanni PERUCCA, 2011. "Consumers’ satisfaction and regulation of local public transport: evidence from European cities," Departmental Working Papers 2011-26, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    20. Lopez-Lambas, María Eugenia & Monzon, Andres, 2010. "Private funding and management for public interchanges in Madrid," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 323-328.

    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:sot:journl:y:2006:i:32:p:26-48. 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: Romeo Danielis (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/xxxxxxx.html .

    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.