Thursday, July 27, 2006
Free Transit Fares?
By offering free transit rides, the San Francisco Bay Area has managed to increase ridership by 15 percent on "spare the air" days. The new mayor of Los Angeles wants to offer a week of free transit.
At first glance, this sounds like a good idea. Transit riders pay only about 20 percent of the cost of service. So by increasing the subsidy from 80 percent to 100 percent -- say, from $4 to $5 a ride -- we can get lots of cars off the road.
The only problem is that it doesn't cost just $4 or $5 to get one person out of their car. If you offer free transit service to new riders, you also have to offer it to existing riders. So, if free transit increases ridership by 15 percent, then you end up spending $10 to $30 or more just to get one person out of their car and onto transit for one ride. (The cost in the San Francisco Bay Area is a little more than $10 per ride, but in other areas it may be much more.)
The real problem with transit is not that it is expensive. As this blogger points out, the real problem is that it is inconvenient. Improvements to bus service that increase frequencies, speeds, and other measures of convenience can increase ridership at a cost of $1 to $6 per ride. Transit agencies should spend their scarce dollars making such improvements rather than giving free transit service or, ahem, building expensive rail lines.
At first glance, this sounds like a good idea. Transit riders pay only about 20 percent of the cost of service. So by increasing the subsidy from 80 percent to 100 percent -- say, from $4 to $5 a ride -- we can get lots of cars off the road.
The only problem is that it doesn't cost just $4 or $5 to get one person out of their car. If you offer free transit service to new riders, you also have to offer it to existing riders. So, if free transit increases ridership by 15 percent, then you end up spending $10 to $30 or more just to get one person out of their car and onto transit for one ride. (The cost in the San Francisco Bay Area is a little more than $10 per ride, but in other areas it may be much more.)
The real problem with transit is not that it is expensive. As this blogger points out, the real problem is that it is inconvenient. Improvements to bus service that increase frequencies, speeds, and other measures of convenience can increase ridership at a cost of $1 to $6 per ride. Transit agencies should spend their scarce dollars making such improvements rather than giving free transit service or, ahem, building expensive rail lines.
Comments:
For once, Randal is correct. As a transit advocate, I must agree with his observations regarding "Spare the Air Day" in the S.F. Bay Area. The cost per additional ride is simply not cost-effective!
"Free" transit also generates security problems, e.g., homeless who decide that transit vehicles make excellent domiciles, a problem they've had in Sacramento when County social services handed out completely free monthly passes to the homeless. It seems that if someone has some kind of stake in something, such as a paid transit ride or pass, they are much less likely to abuse it!
Anon E. Mouse
Post a Comment
"Free" transit also generates security problems, e.g., homeless who decide that transit vehicles make excellent domiciles, a problem they've had in Sacramento when County social services handed out completely free monthly passes to the homeless. It seems that if someone has some kind of stake in something, such as a paid transit ride or pass, they are much less likely to abuse it!
Anon E. Mouse
