International Transport Forum Discussion Papers

ISSN :
2223-439X (online)
DOI :
10.1787/2223439x
Hide / Show Abstract
The International Transport Forum at the OECD is an intergovernmental organisation with 52 member countries. It acts as a strategic think tank for transport policy and organizes an annual summit of ministers. Our work is underpinned by economic research, statistics collection and policy analysis, often undertaken in collaboration with many of the world's leading research figures in academia, business and government. This series of Discussion Papers is intended to disseminate the ITF’s research findings rapidly among specialists in the field concerned.
Previous papers addressing these policy issues are available via http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/20708270
 

State Roles in Providing Affordable Mass Transport Services for Low-Income Residents You or your institution have access to this content

Authors:
Robert Cervero1
Author Affiliations
  • 1: University of California Berkeley, United States

Publication Date
01 May 2011
Bibliographic information
No:
2011/17
Pages
26
DOI
10.1787/5kg9mq4f4627-en

Hide / Show Abstract

Governments support urban mass transport services worldwide under the guise of helping the poor and improving the environment. With more and more governments cash-strapped and facing budgetary shortfalls in other vital areas, the fiscal burdens of underwriting public transport have prompted some observers to question such rationales. This paper reviews the role of states in ensuring affordable mass transport services are available to low-income residents. The heavy financial burdens that the poor sometime face in moving about the city and possible ways of reducing these impacts are discussed. Examples of keeping transit fares affordable while also ensuring reasonably cost-effective mass transport services are cited. Because public policy choices that shape mass transport services are informed by technical evaluations, this paper also examines conventional practices regarding how transport proposals are reviewed and assessed. It argues that moving toward a framework that focuses on enhancing accessibility rather than principally mobility would better represent the long-term impacts of capital investments while also promoting the interests of mobility-disadvantaged populations.