01020542

Component

https://doi.org/10.3141/1986-23

http://scholar.google.com...rown&publication_year=2006

Between 1990 and 2000, transit patronage increased by around 7% in the United States, but there has been wide variation around this mean. Most research attributes variation in ridership change to a combination of socioeconomic and land use factors, which are beyond a transit agency’s control, and service and fare policy decisions, which are within an agency’s control. A study built on this earlier work by examining ridership change at the metropolitan scale for all metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) in the United States that had more than 500,000 people at the time of the 2000 census. The study incorporates several measures of service quality in order to evaluate the relative efficacy of policy decisions about service coverage, frequency, and orientation (central business district radial versus multidestination system orientation). The multivariate analysis shows that transit is growing most rapidly in the nontraditional markets of the West but that much of the regional variation is a function of the particular service coverage, frequency, and orientation decisions made by transit agencies in this region. Service coverage and frequency are the most powerful explanatory variables for variation in ridership change among MSAs with 1 million to 5 million people, whereas a multidestination service orientation is the most important explanation for variation in ridership change among MSAs with 500,000 to 1 million people.

01042059

English

pp 172-181

2006

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board

030909996X

Print

References (23) ; Tables (6)

Fares; Metropolitan areas; Multivariate analysis; Public transit; Quality of service; Ridership; Socioeconomic factors

Metropolitan Statistical Areas

Multiple destinations; Service coverage; Service frequency

United States

Data and Information Technology; Economics; Highways; Planning and Forecasting; Public Transportation; Society

TRIS, TRB, ATRI

Mar 3 2006 10:19AM

• Algorithm for Optimal Bid Packaging for Competitive Contracting in Public Transit
• Allocating Revenues to Public Transit Operators Under an Integrated Fare System
• Bus-and-Rail and All-Bus Transit Systems: Experience in Dallas and Houston, Texas, 1985 to 2003
• Carsharing and Station Cars in Asia: Overview of Japan and Singapore
• Carsharing as Key Contribution to Multimodal and Sustainable Mobility Behavior: Carsharing in Germany
• Carsharing in North America: Market Growth, Current Developments, and Future Potential
• Competition in Bus Public Transport in Israel
• Cost per User as Key Factor in Project Prioritization: Case Study of San Francisco Bay Area, California
• Determinants of Perceived Importance of Targeted Transportation Services for Low-Income Riders
• Development of Asset Management Evaluation Framework in Rail Transit Environment: London Underground Public–Private Partnership
• Examination of Process of Innovation at Transit Systems
• Impact of Public Transit on Employment Status: Disaggregate Analysis of Houston, Texas
• Interoperable Transit Smart Card Systems: Are We Moving Too Slowly or Too Quickly?
• Lean Manufacturing Techniques in Bus and Rail Maintenance: Study at Chicago Transit Authority in Illinois
• Model for Estimating Increased Ridership Caused by Integration of Two Urban Transit Modes: Case Study of Metro and Bus–Minibus Transit Systems, Istanbul, Turkey
• New Technologies for Sustainable Urban Transportation in Europe
• Relocation Simulation Model for Multiple-Station Shared-Use Vehicle Systems
• Ridership Accuracy and Transit Formula Grants
• Sketch Models to Forecast Commuter and Light Rail Ridership: Update to TCRP Report 16
• Sketch Transit Modeling Based on 2000 Census Data
• System Plan for California's Bay Area Regional Express Bus Service
• Transit Attractiveness: Systematic Approach to Transit Performance Measurement
• Who Is Attracted to Carsharing?