The Case for Subsidisation of Urban Public Transport and the Mohring Effect
In this journal, van Reeven (2008) develops a model aimed at showing that scale economies on users' time costs would not provide a justification for public transport subsidies. He claims that a profit-maximising operator allowed to take the demand effects of its pricing into account would offer a frequency f π at least as high as a welfare-maximising one f*, and with no welfare losses. We show that his result depends crucially on a strong assumption of demand. Introducing a slight modification to make it more realistic, we show: (i) f* > f π , (ii) welfare losses emerge under profit-maximisation, (iii) subsidies are required for first-best operation. Thus, the Mohring effect is a valid argument for subsidisation. © 2010 LSE and the University of Bath
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 44 (2010)
Issue (Month): 3 (September)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.bath.ac.uk/e-journals/jtep|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tpe:jtecpo:v:44:y:2010:i:3:p:365-372. 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: (Christopher F. Baum)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.