Benchmarking and improving mass transit systems in the United States based on best-in class practices. Policy implications

Date13 February 2017
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1108/IJLM-01-2015-0031
Pages172-193
Published date13 February 2017
AuthorHokey Min,Young-Hyo Ahn,Thomas Lambert
Subject MatterManagement science & operations,Logistics
Benchmarking and improving
mass transit systems in the
United States based on
best-in class practices
Policy implications
Hokey Min
Department of Management, Bowling Green State University,
Bowling Green, Ohio, USA
Young-Hyo Ahn
Division of International Trade, Incheon National University, Incheon, Korea, and
Thomas Lambert
Department of Political Science, Criminal Justice and Organizational Leadership,
Northern Kentucky University, Highland Heights, Kentucky, USA
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to find ways to develop more efficient mass transit systems across
the USA and, thus, make the best use of state/federal/municipal government funds and taxpayersmonies.
This paper conducts benchmarking studies. In doing so, this paper identifies the best-in class mass transit
practices that every regional mass transit system can emulate.
Design/methodology/approach The continuous underutilization of a mass transit system can increase
public scrutiny concerning the increased investment in mass transit services. To defuse such scrutiny, this
paper analyzes the past (in year 2011) performances of 515 mass transit agencies in the USA using data
envelopment analysis (DEA). Also, to identify which factors influences those performances, the authors
paired DEA scores for transit efficiency at the state level against a set of independent variables using a
special form of regression analysis called Tobit regression.
Findings The authors found that the greater population density of the service area, the greater number
of riders can be served in a short amount of distance and time. Also, the authors discovered that the
transportation mode of mass transit services could affect mass transit efficiency. On the other hand, the
authors found no evidence indicating that the public ownership or private operation of transit systems could
make any differences in the transit efficiency.
Originality/value This paper is one of the few that assessed the performance of mass transit systems in
comparison to their peers using a large-scale data and identify the leading causes of mass transit inefficiency.
Thus, this paper helps transit authorities in handling juggling acts of protecting the conflicting interests of
government policy makers against the general public and, then, make sensible future investment decisions.
Keywords Transportation economics, Transportation decisions
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
Generally, mass transitrefers to a large-scale public transportation service on a fixed route
in shared vehicles in a city or a metropolitan area. These vehicles include cable cars, electric
streetcars, trolley coaches, gasoline- and diesel-powered buses, underground and above-
ground rail rapid transit, ferries, and some commuter trains. In the USA, mass transit has,
for the most part, meant some kind of local bus or passenger rail service (Schrag, 2000).
As the gasoline price hit $5 per gallon insome areas of the USA, ridership of the masstransit
The International Journal of
Logistics Management
Vol. 28 No. 1, 2017
pp. 172-193
© Emerald PublishingLimited
0957-4093
DOI 10.1108/IJLM-01-2015-0031
Received 30 January 2015
Revised 27 June 2015
Accepted 22 August 2015
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0957-4093.htm
The authors would like to express sincere gratitude to both the US Department of Transportation and
the Incheon National University for partly funding this research.
172
IJLM
28,1
system across the USA has risen for the last several years. Indeed, mass transit use over the
first three quarters of 2012 has increased by 2.6 percent, amounting to 201 million more trips
taken in the first nine months of the year than were taken in the same period in 2011 (American
Public Transportation Association, 2013; Hill, 2012). This trend continued in 2013 during which
mass transit ridership grew to 10.7 billion trips, the highest total since 1956, according to
theAmericanPublicTransportationAssociation (2014a). Growing demand for mass transit
often necessitates the expansion of service offerings, the improvement of transportation
infrastructure, the replacement of old vehicles with new ones and the additional hiring of mass
transit employees including drivers and maintenance crews. Such a need typically cannot be
met without securing greater financial resources. In times of budget cuts and government
downsizing, the mass transit authority cannot afford to spend wastefully or to make risky future
investments that cannot be paid back fully. In other words, a thorough analysis of current mass
transit efficiency and some type of management follow up to implement improvements coming
from the results of the analysis are essential for sustaining the vitality of mass transit systems.
Generally, important benefits of mass transit services may include: enhanced travel
choices with public transportation alternatives, improved mobility (especially for the
handicapped and low-income people), enhanced living environments with less traffic
congestion and reduced CO
2
emission, a greater opportunity for advancing transportation
technologies such as the use of biofuel for transit buses, increased traffic safety with less
accidental risks as compared to private transportation, and stimulus for local economic
development. In particular, capital investment in public infrastructure such as mass transit
systems is often linked with local economic improvement. For instance, based on the review
of the academic literature on economic benefits of public infrastructure, Bhatta and Drennan
(2003) observed that such investment tended to yield long-term economic benefits, such as
higher residential property value, higher real wages for local workers, lower unemployment,
and reduced travel time. Similar conclusions are drawn from the more recent studies of
Africas transportation infrastructure (e.g. Boopen, 2006) and Chinas transportation
infrastructure (e.g. Zhou et al., 2007). Overall, investment in mass transit can yield 50,731
jobs per $1 billion invested and sustained higher investment in mass transit can create a
total economic value of $3.7 billion per $1 billion invested annually (American Public
Transportation, 2014b). Especially, the economic impact of a mass transit system on
Americas poor-income families is known to be greater because the mass transit system is an
important means of accessing a cost-effective transportation option (Moulding, 2005).
On the other hand, a masstransit system can increase financialburden for local, state, and
federal governments. According to the American Public Transportation Association (2013),
the USA mass transit system consumed $56 billion for operation, maintenance, and capital
investment in 2010. Controlling mass transit operating costs as well as meeting service
demand remains the greatest challenge for mass transit authorities, private transit service
providers, and public policy makers (Cervero, 2004; Savage, 2004; Polzin and Chu, 2005).
Considering the significant impact of mass transit systems on public well-being,
economic development, and government finances, a growing number of local and state
government officials have attempted to find ways to improve mass transit services, while
better utilizing resources (e.g. drivers, dispatchers, maintenance crews, vehicles, equipment,
depots) required for mass transit services under tight budget constraints. These attempts
include the assessment of the recent performances of mass transit systems across the USA
(including Puerto Rico) in terms of their operating and financial efficiency (e.g. a greater
amount of revenue sources, a greater access to mass transit services, better utilization of
assets, and financial resources including tax dollars). Since mass transit operating efficiency
may hinge on the community setting (i.e., the density of housing development, urban
sprawl) and municipal size, a majority of the published literature regarding public services
has focused on the discussions of appropriate municipal size and its potential impact on
173
Mass transit
systems in
the USA

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT