Affordability of Public Transport A Methodological Clarification
There has been a surge of interest recently on the relation between poverty and transport policies. When analysing the relation between poverty and transport, concern often centres on the affordability of public transport. In this paper we present two alternative definitions of affordability used in the transport literature and discuss their limitations. Any affordability measure covering only transport expenditure is bound to be a very partial view of household welfare. In addition, the required affordability benchmark to determine whether or not transport costs are high is arbitrary. Therefore, the approach that uses the absolute level of these affordability measures is meaningless. We also show in this paper that the change in the affordability measures, as opposed to its absolute level, can be given a more rigorous interpretation in terms of traditional welfare economics. In spite of this last result, we argue that to analyse whether transport subsidies are meeting their social or distributional objectives it may be more fruitful to use traditional income distributional tools such as the relative benefit curve and its associated Gini coefficient. © 2011 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): 45 (2011)
Issue (Month): 3 (September)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.bath.ac.uk/e-journals/jtep|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Banks, James & Blundell, Richard & Lewbel, Arthur, 1996.
"Tax Reform and Welfare Measurement: Do We Need Demand System Estimation?,"
Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(438), pages 1227-41, September.
- James Banks & Richard Blundell & Arthur Lewbel, 1994. "Tax reform and welfare measurement: do we need demand system estimation?," IFS Working Papers W94/11, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
- World Bank, 2002. "Cities on the Move : A World Bank Urban Transport Strategy Review," World Bank Publications, The World Bank, number 15232.
- Cropper, Maureen & Bhattacharya, Soma, 2007. "Public transport subsidies and affordability in Mumbai, India," Policy Research Working Paper Series 4395, The World Bank.
- Muellbauer, John, 1975. "Aggregation, Income Distribution and Consumer Demand," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(4), pages 525-43, October.
- James Banks & Richard Blundell & Arthur Lewbel, 1997. "Quadratic Engel Curves And Consumer Demand," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 79(4), pages 527-539, November.
- Lewbel, Arthur, 1989. "Household equivalence scales and welfare comparisons," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 377-391, August.
- Deaton, Angus S & Muellbauer, John, 1980. "An Almost Ideal Demand System," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(3), pages 312-26, June.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tpe:jtecpo:v:45:y:2011:i:3:p:437-456. 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.