第一英里/最后一英里的补贴拼车:对谁来说有多大价值?

IF 2.1 4区 工程技术 Q3 TRANSPORTATION
Daniel J. Reck, K. Axhausen
{"title":"第一英里/最后一英里的补贴拼车:对谁来说有多大价值?","authors":"Daniel J. Reck, K. Axhausen","doi":"10.3929/ETHZ-B-000354730","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The first/last mile is a long known deterrent to public transportation use, yet difficult to solve with fixed route transit. Many transit agencies are exploring partnerships with ridesourcing companies to offer subsidized feeder services. Ridership, however, has been surprisingly low. We explore two conceptual explanations. First, ridesourcing fares are found to exceed travel time savings for all distances below 1 mile and annual household incomes below USD 30,000 (i.e., the majority of US bus-using households). Subsidies are thus necessary, yet common schemes (flat fees, flat value or percentage discounts) are inequitable as they particularly benefit high-income households (thus miss their main target group). Second, the disutility of the additional transfer (‘transfer penalty’) and wait times exceed travel time savings assuming modest values for all distances below 0.45 miles. Subsidized ridesourcing for the first/last mile is thus not the panacea often portrayed, particularly not for short first/last miles. Where first/last miles are longer, investments in first/last mile services only might miss their purpose as the private car often remains the faster, more convenient and cheaper option. A much more holistic set of policy changes is hence required. Where transit agencies decide to proceed with first/last mile subsidies, they are advised to integrate them into existing fares (offering first/last mile rides for free) as this is the most equitable approach.","PeriodicalId":46721,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"14","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Subsidized ridesourcing for the first/last mile: how valuable for whom?\",\"authors\":\"Daniel J. Reck, K. Axhausen\",\"doi\":\"10.3929/ETHZ-B-000354730\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The first/last mile is a long known deterrent to public transportation use, yet difficult to solve with fixed route transit. Many transit agencies are exploring partnerships with ridesourcing companies to offer subsidized feeder services. Ridership, however, has been surprisingly low. We explore two conceptual explanations. First, ridesourcing fares are found to exceed travel time savings for all distances below 1 mile and annual household incomes below USD 30,000 (i.e., the majority of US bus-using households). Subsidies are thus necessary, yet common schemes (flat fees, flat value or percentage discounts) are inequitable as they particularly benefit high-income households (thus miss their main target group). Second, the disutility of the additional transfer (‘transfer penalty’) and wait times exceed travel time savings assuming modest values for all distances below 0.45 miles. Subsidized ridesourcing for the first/last mile is thus not the panacea often portrayed, particularly not for short first/last miles. Where first/last miles are longer, investments in first/last mile services only might miss their purpose as the private car often remains the faster, more convenient and cheaper option. A much more holistic set of policy changes is hence required. Where transit agencies decide to proceed with first/last mile subsidies, they are advised to integrate them into existing fares (offering first/last mile rides for free) as this is the most equitable approach.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46721,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-07-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"14\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3929/ETHZ-B-000354730\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"TRANSPORTATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3929/ETHZ-B-000354730","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"TRANSPORTATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

摘要

第一英里/最后一英里是公共交通使用的一个众所周知的威慑因素,但很难通过固定路线的交通来解决。许多公交机构正在探索与拼车公司合作,提供补贴接驳服务。然而,客流量却出奇地低。我们探讨了两种概念上的解释。首先,对于1英里以下的所有距离和30000美元以下的家庭年收入(即大多数使用公交车的美国家庭),拼车费用都超过了节省的旅行时间。因此,补贴是必要的,但普通计划(固定费用、固定价值或百分比折扣)是不公平的,因为它们特别有利于高收入家庭(因此没有达到其主要目标群体)。其次,额外换乘(“换乘罚款”)和等待时间的无效性超过了旅行时间节省,假设0.45英里以下的所有距离都有适度的值。因此,第一英里/最后一英里的补贴拼车并不是人们常说的灵丹妙药,尤其是短距离的第一英里/最近一英里。在首/末英里较长的地方,仅对首/末里程服务的投资可能会达不到目的,因为私家车通常仍然是更快、更方便、更便宜的选择。因此,需要一套更加全面的政策变化。如果交通机构决定继续提供首/末英里补贴,建议他们将其纳入现有票价中(免费提供首/最后英里乘车服务),因为这是最公平的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Subsidized ridesourcing for the first/last mile: how valuable for whom?
The first/last mile is a long known deterrent to public transportation use, yet difficult to solve with fixed route transit. Many transit agencies are exploring partnerships with ridesourcing companies to offer subsidized feeder services. Ridership, however, has been surprisingly low. We explore two conceptual explanations. First, ridesourcing fares are found to exceed travel time savings for all distances below 1 mile and annual household incomes below USD 30,000 (i.e., the majority of US bus-using households). Subsidies are thus necessary, yet common schemes (flat fees, flat value or percentage discounts) are inequitable as they particularly benefit high-income households (thus miss their main target group). Second, the disutility of the additional transfer (‘transfer penalty’) and wait times exceed travel time savings assuming modest values for all distances below 0.45 miles. Subsidized ridesourcing for the first/last mile is thus not the panacea often portrayed, particularly not for short first/last miles. Where first/last miles are longer, investments in first/last mile services only might miss their purpose as the private car often remains the faster, more convenient and cheaper option. A much more holistic set of policy changes is hence required. Where transit agencies decide to proceed with first/last mile subsidies, they are advised to integrate them into existing fares (offering first/last mile rides for free) as this is the most equitable approach.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
30 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research (EJTIR) is a peer-reviewed scholarly journal, freely accessible through the internet. EJTIR aims to present the results of high-quality scientific research to a readership of academics, practitioners and policy-makers. It is our ambition to be the journal of choice in the field of transport and infrastructure both for readers and authors. To achieve this ambition, EJTIR distinguishes itself from other journals in its field, both through its scope and the way it is published.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信