What the heck is a choice rider? A theoretical framework and empirical model

IF 1.6 4区 工程技术 Q4 TRANSPORTATION Journal of Transport and Land Use Pub Date : 2022-02-25 DOI:10.5198/jtlu.2022.2096
E. Guerra
{"title":"What the heck is a choice rider? A theoretical framework and empirical model","authors":"E. Guerra","doi":"10.5198/jtlu.2022.2096","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As local, state, and federal agencies began investing substantial resources into subsidizing transit in the 1960s and ‘70s, public documents argued that transit agencies should focus on attracting choice riders instead of dependent riders, who have no alternatives and use transit regardless of service quality. After six decades, the definitions, uses, and implications of the terms choice and dependent rider have remained consistent in the academic and professional literature. These definitions, however, lack a strong theoretical grounding or empirical evidence to support them. Using travel diary data from the Philadelphia region, I estimate discrete choice models to identify choice riders, who I define as those who have close to a 50% probability of choosing between a car or transit for a given trip. The Philadelphia region, which has a diverse range of transit users and transit services, is an ideal place to develop and fit an empirical model of choice ridership. Attributes assumed to be associated with dependent riders, such as lack of a car, low income, and being a racial or ethnic minority, are much more prevalent among choice riders than the general metropolitan population. Choice riders are also diverse, with a mix of racial backgrounds, income levels, educational attainment, and access to private cars. Transit dependency, by contrast, is rare. The lowest and highest income residents generally only choose transit when service quality is high, and transit is cost and time competitive with the car.","PeriodicalId":47271,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Transport and Land Use","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Transport and Land Use","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2022.2096","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"TRANSPORTATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

As local, state, and federal agencies began investing substantial resources into subsidizing transit in the 1960s and ‘70s, public documents argued that transit agencies should focus on attracting choice riders instead of dependent riders, who have no alternatives and use transit regardless of service quality. After six decades, the definitions, uses, and implications of the terms choice and dependent rider have remained consistent in the academic and professional literature. These definitions, however, lack a strong theoretical grounding or empirical evidence to support them. Using travel diary data from the Philadelphia region, I estimate discrete choice models to identify choice riders, who I define as those who have close to a 50% probability of choosing between a car or transit for a given trip. The Philadelphia region, which has a diverse range of transit users and transit services, is an ideal place to develop and fit an empirical model of choice ridership. Attributes assumed to be associated with dependent riders, such as lack of a car, low income, and being a racial or ethnic minority, are much more prevalent among choice riders than the general metropolitan population. Choice riders are also diverse, with a mix of racial backgrounds, income levels, educational attainment, and access to private cars. Transit dependency, by contrast, is rare. The lowest and highest income residents generally only choose transit when service quality is high, and transit is cost and time competitive with the car.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
选择骑手到底是什么?一个理论框架和经验模型
随着地方、州和联邦机构在20世纪60年代和70年代开始投入大量资源补贴交通,公共文件认为,交通机构应该专注于吸引选择性乘客,而不是依赖性乘客,因为他们别无选择,无论服务质量如何都使用交通。60年后,术语选择和从属附加条款的定义、用法和含义在学术和专业文献中保持一致。然而,这些定义缺乏强有力的理论基础或经验证据来支持它们。使用费城地区的旅行日记数据,我估计了离散选择模型来识别选择乘客,我将他们定义为在给定的旅行中有接近50%的概率在汽车或交通工具之间做出选择的人。费城地区拥有各种各样的公交用户和公交服务,是开发和拟合选择乘客量实证模型的理想场所。被认为与依赖性骑手有关的特征,如无车、低收入、种族或少数民族,在选择骑手中比普通大都市人群更普遍。选择骑手也多种多样,包括种族背景、收入水平、教育程度和私家车使用情况。相比之下,对公交的依赖是罕见的。收入最低和最高的居民通常只有在服务质量高、交通成本和时间与汽车有竞争力的情况下才会选择公交。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.30%
发文量
34
审稿时长
30 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Transport and Land Usepublishes original interdisciplinary papers on the interaction of transport and land use. Domains include: engineering, planning, modeling, behavior, economics, geography, regional science, sociology, architecture and design, network science, and complex systems. Papers reporting innovative methodologies, original data, and new empirical findings are especially encouraged.
期刊最新文献
Access-based land value appreciation for assessing project benefits Revealing social dimensions of urban mobility with big data: A timely dialogue Exploring practices for facilitating integrated strategic land use and transport planning in the Nordic countries Does rail transit access affect firm dynamics? Analysis of firm births and closures in Maryland, USA Incorporating diminishing returns to opportunities in access: Development of an open-source walkability index based on multi-activity accessibility
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1