Do preferences for BRT and LRT change as a voter, citizen, tax payer, or self-interested resident?
- PDF / 1,731,942 Bytes
- 50 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 33 Downloads / 147 Views
Do preferences for BRT and LRT change as a voter, citizen, tax payer, or self‑interested resident? Camila Balbontin1 · David A. Hensher1 · Chinh Ho1 · Corinne Mulley1
© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019
Abstract Interest in modal preferences remains a topic of high interest as governments make infrastructure decisions that often favour one mode over the other. An informative input into the infrastructure selection process should be the preferences of residents, since they can guide buy into support political and bureaucratic choice making. Cost–benefit analysis (CBA) uses the self-interest preferences of individuals as the relevant interpretation of ‘individual preferences count’, which in aggregate represent the benefit to society of candidate investments. However, the CBA benefit calculations can be rather restrictive with other preference metrics often being identified and used in various ways to inform the debate on infrastructure support. In this paper we assess how the preferences for bus rapid transit (BRT) and light rail transit (LRT) change with different roles the residents may play: a citizen or altruistic resident, a self-interested resident, a tax-payer, and as a voter. We use data collected in five countries to investigate preference differences and also to establish whether there is replicability of the findings across geographical jurisdictions. The findings suggest that there are, in general, noticeable differences in preference revelation across the metrics; however there are also both similarities and differences in the role of specific attribute drivers (as represented by willingness to pay, and magnitude of support for a specific mode) within and between preference metrics across countries. Keywords Bus rapid transit · Light rail transit · Citizen versus private preferences · Cross culture contrasts · Five countries · Community preference model · Mixed logit · Willingness to pay
* Camila Balbontin [email protected] David A. Hensher [email protected] Chinh Ho [email protected] Corinne Mulley [email protected] 1
The University of Sydney Business School, Institute of Transport and Logistics Studies, Darlington, Sydney, NSW 2008, Australia
13
Vol.:(0123456789)
Transportation
Introduction When seeking to understand individual preferences for specific investments including transport infrastructure scenarios, the position that respondents take (e.g., a personal or a citizen perspective), plays a fundamental role in determining the resulting preference expression and hence arguments that can be mounted for support (or not) of particular investments. This is of great interest in the highly emotional debate on the role of busbased and rail-based corridor investments (Hensher 2007; Kain 1988) which is the focus of this paper. The transport literature in the main focusses on revealing individual preferences aligned with a self-interest person utility gain preference paradigm (some exceptions being, for example, Daniels an
Data Loading...
