美国客运列车的作用:普通运输公司的成本比较

William P. O'Dea
{"title":"美国客运列车的作用:普通运输公司的成本比较","authors":"William P. O'Dea","doi":"10.1016/0191-2607(91)90020-Q","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The objective of this article is to establish whether the train has a role to play in the market for intercity passenger travel in the United States. To accomplish this objective, we compare the common carriers on the basis of thier cost effectiveness in moving a given flow of passengers between two points a specified distance apart. The comparisons are based on cost models which highlight the technological differences between the modes and eliminate distortions caused by public policy choices. By varying the size of the passenger flow and trip distance, we develop a notion of each common carrier's ideal operating environment. We find that the cost of the right-of-way is the major factor limiting the range of travel situations in which the train is cost competitive with the other common carriers. More specifically, our results indicate that Amtrak's service in the Northeast Corridor should be continued in the short run. In the long run, the possibility of upgrading Amtrak's service in the Northeast Corridor to high-speed service should be investigated. Outside the Northeast Corridor, we find that high-speed train service should be able to cover its operating costs but not its capital costs.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":101260,"journal":{"name":"Transportation Research Part A: General","volume":"25 6","pages":"Pages 429-442"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1991-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/0191-2607(91)90020-Q","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The role of the passenger train in the United States: A cost comparison of the common carriers\",\"authors\":\"William P. O'Dea\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/0191-2607(91)90020-Q\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The objective of this article is to establish whether the train has a role to play in the market for intercity passenger travel in the United States. To accomplish this objective, we compare the common carriers on the basis of thier cost effectiveness in moving a given flow of passengers between two points a specified distance apart. The comparisons are based on cost models which highlight the technological differences between the modes and eliminate distortions caused by public policy choices. By varying the size of the passenger flow and trip distance, we develop a notion of each common carrier's ideal operating environment. We find that the cost of the right-of-way is the major factor limiting the range of travel situations in which the train is cost competitive with the other common carriers. More specifically, our results indicate that Amtrak's service in the Northeast Corridor should be continued in the short run. In the long run, the possibility of upgrading Amtrak's service in the Northeast Corridor to high-speed service should be investigated. Outside the Northeast Corridor, we find that high-speed train service should be able to cover its operating costs but not its capital costs.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":101260,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Transportation Research Part A: General\",\"volume\":\"25 6\",\"pages\":\"Pages 429-442\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1991-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/0191-2607(91)90020-Q\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Transportation Research Part A: General\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/019126079190020Q\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transportation Research Part A: General","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/019126079190020Q","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文的目的是确定火车是否在美国城际客运市场中发挥作用。为了实现这一目标,我们根据在相隔一定距离的两个地点之间运送给定客流的成本效益,对普通承运人进行比较。这种比较基于成本模型,该模型突出了两种模式之间的技术差异,并消除了公共政策选择造成的扭曲。通过改变客流的大小和行程距离,我们得出了每个公共航空公司理想运营环境的概念。我们发现路权的成本是限制火车与其他普通运输工具相比具有成本竞争力的旅行情况范围的主要因素。更具体地说,我们的结果表明,美国铁路公司在东北走廊的服务应该在短期内继续下去。从长远来看,应该研究将美国铁路公司在东北走廊的服务升级为高速服务的可能性。在东北走廊以外,我们发现高铁服务应该能够覆盖其运营成本,而不是资本成本。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The role of the passenger train in the United States: A cost comparison of the common carriers

The objective of this article is to establish whether the train has a role to play in the market for intercity passenger travel in the United States. To accomplish this objective, we compare the common carriers on the basis of thier cost effectiveness in moving a given flow of passengers between two points a specified distance apart. The comparisons are based on cost models which highlight the technological differences between the modes and eliminate distortions caused by public policy choices. By varying the size of the passenger flow and trip distance, we develop a notion of each common carrier's ideal operating environment. We find that the cost of the right-of-way is the major factor limiting the range of travel situations in which the train is cost competitive with the other common carriers. More specifically, our results indicate that Amtrak's service in the Northeast Corridor should be continued in the short run. In the long run, the possibility of upgrading Amtrak's service in the Northeast Corridor to high-speed service should be investigated. Outside the Northeast Corridor, we find that high-speed train service should be able to cover its operating costs but not its capital costs.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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