Abstract: Using individual travel diary data collected before and after the rail transit coverage expansion in urban Beijing, this paper estimates the impact of rail accessibility improvement on the usage of rail transit, automobiles, buses, walking, and bicycling, measured as percent distance traveled by each mode in an individual trip. My results indicate that the average rail transit usage significantly increased, by 98.3% for commuters residing in the zones where the distances to the nearest station decreased because of the expansion, relative to commuters in the zones where the distances did not change. I also find that auto usage significantly decreased, by 19.8%, while the impact on bus usage was small and not statistically significant. Average walking and bicycling distance (combined) increased by 11.8%, indicating that walking and bicycling are complements to urban rail transit, instead of substitutes. Furthermore, I find that estimated changes in auto usage and rail transit usage vary significantly with auto ownership and income.

Abstract: This paper uses an analytical-simulation model to examine the optimal extent and welfare effects of pricing reforms for passenger transportation in Mexico City. The model incorporates travel by auto, microbus, public bus, and rail, plus externalities from local and global air pollution, traffic congestion, and road accidents. In our benchmark case, the optimal gasoline tax is $2.72 (29.6 pesos) per gallon, or 16 times the current tax. However, a per-mile toll would reduce traffic congestion, the largest externality, more directly, and we put the optimized auto toll at 20.3 cents per mile. Tolls should also be imposed on microbuses even though the welfare gains are relatively modest, as are those from reforming public transit fares.

Abstract: The document describes the Washington START transportation simulation model. In particular, it provides information about the model structure, the equilibrium concept, and the data used to calibrate the model. It also briefly describes the reference scenario and the elasticity analysis. Finally, the document discusses past and potential future applications and possible directions for model extensions.

Abstract: This paper derives intuitive and empirically useful formulas for the optimal pricing of passenger transit and for the welfare effects of adjusting current fare subsidies, for peak and off-peak urban rail and bus systems. The formulas are implemented based on a detailed estimation of parameter values for the metropolitan areas of Washington (D.C.), Los Angeles, and London. Our analysis accounts for congestion, pollution, and accident externalities from automobiles and from transit vehicles; scale economies in transit supply; costs of accessing and waiting for transit service as well as service crowding costs; and agency adjustment of transit frequency, vehicle size, and route network to induced changes in demand for passenger miles.The results support the efficiency case for the large fare subsidies currently applied across mode, period, and city. In almost all cases, fare subsidies of 50 percent or more of operating costs are welfare improving at the margin, and this finding is robust to alternative assumptions and parameters.

Abstract: We evaluate and compare the long-term economic effects of three cordon-based road pricing schemes applied to the Washington, DC, metropolitan area. To conduct this analysis, we employ a spatially disaggregated general equilibrium model of a regional economy that incorporates the decisions of residents, firms, and developers, integrated with a spatially disaggregated strategic transportation planning model that features mode, time period, and route choice.We find that all cordon pricing schemes increase welfare of the residents, as well as lead to GDP growth. At the optimum, the larger cordon and a double cordon lead to higher benefits than the small cordon encompassing downtown core. Nevertheless, the small cordon seems to be a safer bet because when the toll charge is set suboptimally, the net benefits from the small cordon compared to the optimum change negligibly, while the net benefits from the larger cordon decline sharply as the charge deviates from the optimal level.

Abstract: The discrepancy between transit’s large share of local transportation resources and its generally low share of local trips has raised questions about the use of scarce transportation funds for this purpose. We use a regional transport model consistent with utility theory and calibrated for the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area to estimate the travel benefits of the local transit system to transit users and the congestion-reduction benefits to motorists. We find that (i) rail transit generates congestion-reduction benefits that exceed rail subsidies; (ii) the combined benefits of rail and bus transit easily exceed local transit subsidies generally; (iii) the lowest-income group receives a disproportionately low share of the transit benefits, both in absolute terms and as a share of total income; and (iv) for practical purposes, the scale of the current transit system is about optimal.

Abstract:

This paper compares the efficiency of a single lane toll, a congestion tax applied uniformly across freeway lanes, a gasoline tax, and a transit fare subsidy at reducing traffic congestion. The model incorporates a variety of conditions required to reach an efficient outcome. These include conditions for the efficient allocation of travel among competing modes, travel at peak versus off-peak periods, and drivers with high and low time costs sorted onto faster and slower freeway lanes.

Each policy violates some or all of the efficiency conditions. Under wide parameter scenarios, the single lane toll, gasoline tax, and transit subsidy forgo at least two thirds of the efficiency gains under an "ideal" congestion tax that varies across lanes. In contrast, the uniform congestion tax can achieve more than 90 percent of the efficiency gains, despite failing to separate out drivers with high and low time costs onto different freeway lanes.