Analyzing equity impacts of transit fare changes: Case study of Alameda-Contra Costa Transit, California

Cornelius Nuworsoo, Aaron Golub, Elizabeth Deakin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

29 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Many public transit agencies consider increasing fares when faced with budget shortfalls. This paper analyzes the Alameda-Contra Costa (AC) Transit District's five alternative fare proposals introduced for public discussion in March 2005. The proposals combined fare hikes, base fare reductions, eliminations of free transfers, and discontinuation of periodic passes. Using the agency's 2002 on-board survey data, the study assessed the impacts of individual fare proposals on different subsets of riders and evaluated if they were equitable; and estimated potential fare revenues, using alternative price elasticities to estimate changes in ridership due to changes in price. The analysis revealed that proposals that increased the cost of transfers or eliminated unlimited-use passes produced dramatically unequal impacts on certain riders. Proposals for flat fares per ride were found to be least equitable, even when the base fare was lowered, because lower income riders, youth, and minorities made more trips and transferred more frequently than their more affluent counterparts. Proposals that maintained existing pass instruments and allowed transfers for small fees were the most favorable. The paper demonstrates the utility of on-board surveys and details an approach that could be widely used for evaluation of equity in public transit and other areas.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)360-368
Number of pages9
JournalEvaluation and Program Planning
Volume32
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 2009

Fingerprint

equity
pricing
Fees and Charges
Elasticity
Budgets
elasticity
income
Costs and Cost Analysis
cost
price elasticity
price
public
Surveys and Questionnaires
Equity
fee
revenue
budget
low income
Public transit
minority

Keywords

  • Elasticity
  • Equity
  • Evaluation
  • Fare
  • Impact
  • Onboard survey
  • Pricing
  • Public transit
  • Revenue

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Business and International Management
  • Strategy and Management
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Social Psychology
  • Geography, Planning and Development

Cite this

Analyzing equity impacts of transit fare changes : Case study of Alameda-Contra Costa Transit, California. / Nuworsoo, Cornelius; Golub, Aaron; Deakin, Elizabeth.

In: Evaluation and Program Planning, Vol. 32, No. 4, 11.2009, p. 360-368.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Nuworsoo, Cornelius ; Golub, Aaron ; Deakin, Elizabeth. / Analyzing equity impacts of transit fare changes : Case study of Alameda-Contra Costa Transit, California. In: Evaluation and Program Planning. 2009 ; Vol. 32, No. 4. pp. 360-368.
@article{4653b20788134dbcb3be8a1e88160a33,
title = "Analyzing equity impacts of transit fare changes: Case study of Alameda-Contra Costa Transit, California",
abstract = "Many public transit agencies consider increasing fares when faced with budget shortfalls. This paper analyzes the Alameda-Contra Costa (AC) Transit District's five alternative fare proposals introduced for public discussion in March 2005. The proposals combined fare hikes, base fare reductions, eliminations of free transfers, and discontinuation of periodic passes. Using the agency's 2002 on-board survey data, the study assessed the impacts of individual fare proposals on different subsets of riders and evaluated if they were equitable; and estimated potential fare revenues, using alternative price elasticities to estimate changes in ridership due to changes in price. The analysis revealed that proposals that increased the cost of transfers or eliminated unlimited-use passes produced dramatically unequal impacts on certain riders. Proposals for flat fares per ride were found to be least equitable, even when the base fare was lowered, because lower income riders, youth, and minorities made more trips and transferred more frequently than their more affluent counterparts. Proposals that maintained existing pass instruments and allowed transfers for small fees were the most favorable. The paper demonstrates the utility of on-board surveys and details an approach that could be widely used for evaluation of equity in public transit and other areas.",
keywords = "Elasticity, Equity, Evaluation, Fare, Impact, Onboard survey, Pricing, Public transit, Revenue",
author = "Cornelius Nuworsoo and Aaron Golub and Elizabeth Deakin",
year = "2009",
month = "11",
doi = "10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2009.06.009",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "32",
pages = "360--368",
journal = "Evaluation and Program Planning",
issn = "0149-7189",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Analyzing equity impacts of transit fare changes

T2 - Case study of Alameda-Contra Costa Transit, California

AU - Nuworsoo, Cornelius

AU - Golub, Aaron

AU - Deakin, Elizabeth

PY - 2009/11

Y1 - 2009/11

N2 - Many public transit agencies consider increasing fares when faced with budget shortfalls. This paper analyzes the Alameda-Contra Costa (AC) Transit District's five alternative fare proposals introduced for public discussion in March 2005. The proposals combined fare hikes, base fare reductions, eliminations of free transfers, and discontinuation of periodic passes. Using the agency's 2002 on-board survey data, the study assessed the impacts of individual fare proposals on different subsets of riders and evaluated if they were equitable; and estimated potential fare revenues, using alternative price elasticities to estimate changes in ridership due to changes in price. The analysis revealed that proposals that increased the cost of transfers or eliminated unlimited-use passes produced dramatically unequal impacts on certain riders. Proposals for flat fares per ride were found to be least equitable, even when the base fare was lowered, because lower income riders, youth, and minorities made more trips and transferred more frequently than their more affluent counterparts. Proposals that maintained existing pass instruments and allowed transfers for small fees were the most favorable. The paper demonstrates the utility of on-board surveys and details an approach that could be widely used for evaluation of equity in public transit and other areas.

AB - Many public transit agencies consider increasing fares when faced with budget shortfalls. This paper analyzes the Alameda-Contra Costa (AC) Transit District's five alternative fare proposals introduced for public discussion in March 2005. The proposals combined fare hikes, base fare reductions, eliminations of free transfers, and discontinuation of periodic passes. Using the agency's 2002 on-board survey data, the study assessed the impacts of individual fare proposals on different subsets of riders and evaluated if they were equitable; and estimated potential fare revenues, using alternative price elasticities to estimate changes in ridership due to changes in price. The analysis revealed that proposals that increased the cost of transfers or eliminated unlimited-use passes produced dramatically unequal impacts on certain riders. Proposals for flat fares per ride were found to be least equitable, even when the base fare was lowered, because lower income riders, youth, and minorities made more trips and transferred more frequently than their more affluent counterparts. Proposals that maintained existing pass instruments and allowed transfers for small fees were the most favorable. The paper demonstrates the utility of on-board surveys and details an approach that could be widely used for evaluation of equity in public transit and other areas.

KW - Elasticity

KW - Equity

KW - Evaluation

KW - Fare

KW - Impact

KW - Onboard survey

KW - Pricing

KW - Public transit

KW - Revenue

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=70350286212&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=70350286212&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2009.06.009

DO - 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2009.06.009

M3 - Article

C2 - 19616299

AN - SCOPUS:70350286212

VL - 32

SP - 360

EP - 368

JO - Evaluation and Program Planning

JF - Evaluation and Program Planning

SN - 0149-7189

IS - 4

ER -