Economics of mass transit

I ran across this article that discusses the economic reality of why people in America don’t use the public transportation. I find it meaningful because he address the value of the commuter’s time, which he purports to be the most important variable and is usually ignored by those that try to get people to adopt mass-transit.

Basically, it boils down to this: if I can drive there faster than I can get there via mass-transit, I will drive because my time has real (i.e. economic) value to me. This is more pronounced the more money you make, because your time is appropriately more valuable. Also, even if it takes the same amount of time, most people will choose to drive because time spent by yourself in your car (where you can control your immediate environment) is worth more to people than time spent on a bus or train where you are crowded with other people you’d rather not be with if you had an alternative.

In his analysis he only discusses the US, comparing places like NY where it makes sense for most people to use mass transit, to Moab, UT where obviously no one uses mass transit. What I find most compelling about it though, is that even though he never mentions it, his tenets seem to apply perfectly to Japan, where mass transit is almost ubiquitous and is used by practically everyone.

Let’s look at some of his conclusions and see how well they apply to Japan and to my commute to school here in Austin:

1. The out of pocket costs must be the same or less for public transport as for private transport. You might get away with a slight overage if public transport offers a real premium in convenience or comfort, but it had better be a clear advantage to the consumer.

Definately true in Japan. Public transportation is cheap, and cars are very expensive there. Especially with the prohibative tax on older cars there, having to regularly eat the cost of depreciation on new cars makes owning a car even more expensive. This is also true for me here in Austin, where riding the UT bus is free.

2. The time costs have to be comparable. This means:
   1. Actual travel time has to be comparable. The convoluted routes that buses typically travel to access the largest possible area with the fewest routes are a guaranteed recipe for a failed mass-transit system.

   This is very true in urban Japan. Traffic is so bad and the train system is efficient enough that it’s not seen as too big of a hassle to take the subway. Not too bad for me here in Austin, where besides the primary route that goes to a stop 30 seconds away from my front door, there is a second route that is a 10 minute walk from my apartment if the first route is late or crowded.

   2. The schedule has to be frequent enough that transfers have negligible time impact.

   Generally true in Japan, but less so as you get more rural. Not so good here in Austin, but I don’t have to transfer buses to get to school so it isn’t a problem for me.

   3. The schedule has to be frequent enough that waiting time at the trip origin has negligible time impact.

   Good throughout most of Japan, but pretty bad in rural areas (not surprisingly). This is also pretty good for me here in Austin, where buses come (optimally) about every 20 minutes. My bus is notoriously late during afternoon rush hour though, but I have that 2nd bus route to fall back upon.

   4. The system has to be dense enough that transit time from the final stop to the destination has negligible time impact.

   Good in Japan, especially in cities. Good for me in Austin too.
   

3. The system has to be more dependable than a private automobile. This means:
   1. Work stoppages and strikes are absolutely impermissible.

   Japan is absolutely wonderful in this area. The only time I’ve encountered late or cancelled trains there was due to 1) severe weather, or 2) unavoidable accidents (people committing suicide by jumping in front of the train). Not so good here in Austin. No service on Saturdays, and there is a 1 to 2-week period of non-service in between semesters (I’m a grad student so no holiday for me) and there have been strikes before. During these times I have to drive or have my wife drop me off. There is a city bus I could take instead of the school bus, but it’s too infrequent, too far away, and takes too long (fails every point in #2). Hence, I don’t use it.

   2. The system has to have enough peak capacity to carry all passengers.

   Downtown Tokyo and Osaka aren’t so good here, but they make it work, and Japanese have a higher tolerance to sardine-packing than Americans do. My bus is pretty good about this. Usually I am able to get a seat, and I never seen it so full that more people couldn’t get on.

   3. Routes have to be simple and absolutely fixed. Far too many systems vary routes with time of day, use the same number for different routes, omit stops or entire segments of the route at times, or change routes frequently. When I’m in a city and have a choice of rail or bus, I take rail every time, simply because you can’t rip up tracks capriciously and reroute them. (I did see a city once where it happened – would you be surprised if I said it was Sofia, Bulgaria?)

   Japan gets a practically perfect score here. The bus system here is pretty bad on this point, though. It combines with another route after 7:00 pm and also on Sundays. Again it combined during the summer. Also, every semester they slightly change routes and a few stops. It hasn’t effected me, but it certainly does others.

   4. Information about the system has to be available everywhere. Every stop must have a map of the whole system with schedules, and the information must be current. Areas between stops must have frequent signs to the nearest transit stops.

   Japan again has a perfect score here. Even the most rural train station has the complete schedule for every day of the year and a map of the line. Even bus stations have a listing of all the times. My bus system here in Austin is abyssmal on this. The only way to know the route beforehand is to look it up on the internet.

   5. The system layout has to be predictable. Ever been in a city and walked to a major artery hoping to find a bus stop, only to find the buses don’t run on that street? Instead the buses run down some residential street because the system is trying to cover the most ground with the fewest buses, or some alderman lives there and wants convenient bus transportation.

   Japan is again excellent here. Major roads always have a bus to somewhere, and train stations are spaced regularly with lines going to logical places. The Austin bus system is only so-so here, some major roads have bus stops, others don’t. Sometimes buses that go down a major street don’t stop on it.

   6. Transportation has to be available at all times. If you even occasionally find yourself going places on holidays or odd hours when transit is either unavailable or infrequent, you’ll opt to get a car.

   Again perfect marks for Japan. Even during New Years the trains and buses run, albeit on a reduced schedule. Austin is abyssmal here.

So what are the results? In Japan, I used the train all the time when I was in Kyoto and Kanto. Visiting my wife’s home we don’t use it so much because they have several cars and live in a very rural area where public transportation isn’t so convenient. Here in Austin, I ride the bus when it is advantageous to me: going to and from school. This gives the additional benefit of letting my wife have the car during the day for running errands. Otherwise, we use the car for everything else.