policy brief

Could Transportation Network Companies help Improve Rail Commuting?

Abstract

Commuter rail is known to have a “first- and last-mile” problem (i.e., a lack of options for getting commuters to and from a rail station). The first- and last-mile dilemma creates inequalities in access. For example, high-income commuters drive to work (forgoing transit altogether), middle-income commuters drive to a rail station and pay to park, and low-income commuters rely on feeder buses or walking to reach a rail station. Transportation network companies (TNCs), like Uber and Lyft, are a viable option for connecting travelers to rail stations, especially for those who don’t own a car, however, their high fares make them attractive only to higher-income travelers. To close this equity gap, subsidies could be provided for TNC rides that connect travelers to commuter rail. To explore this concept further, we developed idealized (but physically realistic and rational) models to describe communities in the San Francisco Bay Area, and simulated the effects of various subsidization policies (i.e., providing subsidies for TNC rides to and from rail stations, increasing rail stations parking fees) using real-world data representative of Bay Area commuter populations.

research report

Subsidizing Transportation Network Companies to Support Commutes by Rail

Abstract

The research team explores how rail transit’s first- and last-mile issues might be addressed by partnering with transportation network companies (TNCs) like Uber and Lyft. The goal is to lure high-income commuters to shift from cars to TNCs and rail. The team also explores how rail and TNC partnerships can improve travel for low-income commuters who currently rely on low-frequency bus services. The researchers parametrically test subsidizing TNC fares for feeder services in the San Francisco Bay Area in an idealized fashion. Inputs such as the residents’ value of time and vehicle ownership were taken from various local data sources. The communities that were selected for the study are served to different degrees by the BART rail system. The research includes that the optimal policy must be tailored to the characteristics of the community it serves. In dense, walkable communities with strong bus service near rail stations, TNC subsidies should be targeted to less accessible neighborhoods and low-income commuters to not compete with bus transit and active modes like walking. For lower-density communities with limited dedicated bus feeder service, TNC subsidization can be applied more broadly, although disincentives, like increasing rail parking fees, must be considered carefully because they can induce commuters to drive directly to work instead. The research paper concludes with a discussion of how subsidies might be covered by reallocating existing resources in different ways.

policy brief

Travel Varies Greatly Between Voluntary Versus Involuntary Carless Households in California

Abstract

In spite of the critical importance of mobility for quality of life and economic well-being, the travel behavior of households without motor vehicles has received insufficient attention even though “carlessness” may bethe most vivid expression of mobility disadvantage in our car-centric society. Approximately 10.6 million (9 %) of U.S. households do not own a motor vehicle (car, pickup, van, SUV, or motorbike), including over one million in California. These “carless” households form two groups: (1) involuntarily carless households who are forced to live without cars, and (2) voluntarily carless households who chose to do so. Since one of the strategic goals of federal transportation policy is “to increase transportation choices and access to transportation services for all” it is essential to understand the travel behavior of households who are unable to own a motor vehicle. Indeed, many involuntarily carless households are experiencing economic hardship, disabilities, racial and age discrimination, or cultural barriers. Understanding the travel pattern of voluntarily carless households is also necessary to formulate policies aimed at decreasing vehicle use. Reducing personal vehicle use would help relieve congestion, decrease road accidents, improve air quality, cut emissions of greenhouse gases, and improve the health of people who switch to more active modes, such as walking and biking.

policy brief

A Review of Reduced and Free Transit Fare Programs in California

Abstract

Free or reduced-fare transit passes have the potential to increase transit ridership, enhance the mobility of underserved groups (e.g., low-income, seniors, and youth), and reduce the environmental footprint of transportation. Under the right conditions, these programs can also help reduce traffic congestion and motor vehicle use. Transit agencies in different parts of the world have been experimenting with free or reduced-fare transit for decades, yet there are still substantial concerns about the impacts of free or reduced-fare transit on ridership as well as on the fiscal health of transit agencies. Some of these concerns linger partly because rigorous academic studies on free and reduced-fare transit passes are still rare.

research report

Zero-Emission Bus Implementation Guidebook for California Transit Fleets

Abstract

Transit bus operations in California are experiencing new challenges due to economic conditions and the ongoing global pandemic. A confluence of factors has created a focus on this critical public-needs-serving industry, due to state and local efforts to reduce emissions of pollutants and climate-changing gases. Transit bus operations in California provide essential and additional useful services that offer critical mobility to needy populations (elderly and handicapped) as well as many other groups for whom transit buses provide the most economical, convenient, and low-emission options. To address the role of transit bus operations in meeting California’s aggressive greenhouse gas (GHG) and emissions, the California Air Resources Board (ARB) has implemented an ambitious Innovative Clean Transit (ICT) regulation that requires all public transit agencies to gradually transition to a 100 percent zero-emission bus (ZEB) fleet.1 Beginning in 2029, 100% of new purchases by transit agencies must be ZEBs, with a goal for a full transition by 2040. Prior to that 25% of purchases of new buses must be ZEBs in 2023-2025 for large transit agencies, rising to 50% in 2026-2028. For smaller transit agencies, defined as those with less than 100 buses in annual maximum service, there is no requirement for 2023-2025 and the requirement for 2026-2028 is 25%, but the 100% ZEB purchase requirement starting in 2029 applies to all agencies.

research report

Financing the Future: Examining the Fiscal Landscape of California Public Transit in the Wake of the Pandemic

Abstract

California and its regional and local governments have invested heavily in public transit over the past half-century to provide an alternative to driving, ease traffic congestion, reduce emissions, slow climate change, steer new development, and provide mobility for those without. As a result, bus service has improved and expanded, and many parts of the state’s metropolitan areas are now served by rail transit. Yet today, many of the state’s transit systems are struggling operationally and financially. Ridership began eroding in the half-decade leading up to 2020 and plummeted at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Three federal pandemic relief bills provided a critical lifeline to keep struggling transit systems afloat early on, but these funds are running out. Meanwhile, operating costs have risen, ridership and fare revenues have only partially returned, and some transit systems face “fiscal cliffs,” where they will need substantial new infusions of funding, substantial cuts in costs and service, or some combination of the two. Against this backdrop, this report examines the current state of California transit finance: why ridership and fare revenues are down and their prospects for recovery; what lessons the successful federal relief bills provide; why commuter-oriented systems are struggling financially much more than those that primarily service transit-reliant riders; and what the financial managers at transit systems have done to cope with this turbulent time and how they see their future financial prospects.

policy brief

How Seven Cities Are Exploring Congestion Pricing Strategies

Publication Date

March 29, 2023

Author(s)

Jonathon Colner, Mollie Cohen D'Agostino

Abstract

Congestion pricing is a vehicle tolling system that imposes fees to drive within a congested area, typically a downtown district. Cities that already have congestion pricing policies in place have been studied extensively. Notable examples are Singapore, London, Stockholm, Milan, and Gothenburg. These cities have appreciated a range of benefits from congestion pricing, including reductions in peak traffic, vehicle miles traveled, and emissions, as well as increased revenues for transportation investments. 

presentation

Equity in Project Prioritization and Planning at State and Regional Transportation Agencies

policy brief

Freight Companies Can Share Assets to Achieve Cost and Emission Reductions and Transition to Zero Emission Vehicles

Abstract

Researchers at the University of California, Davis developed a logistics decision-support tool that facilitates the joint routing of pick-ups and deliveries for cooperating entities to reduce environmental impacts and transport costs. The researchers implemented the tool in several hypothetical case studies to better understand the impact of joint routing and zero-emission vehicle policies on transport companies. The tool quantifies the cost and emissions savings from coordinated operations (pick-up and delivery) by estimating reduced fleet requirements and improved utilization factors. Additionally, the tool can consider the technical specifications (e.g., payload, range) and requirements (e.g., charging/fueling) of zero-emission vehicles.

published journal article

Assessing last-mile distribution resilience under demand disruptions

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic led to a significant breakdown of the traditional retail sector resulting in an unprecedented surge in e-commerce demand for the delivery of essential goods. Consequently, the pandemic raised concerns pertaining to e-retailers’ ability to maintain and efficiently restore the level of service in the event of such low-probability high-severity market disruptions. Thus, considering e-retailers’ role in the supply of essential goods, this study assesses the resilience of last-mile distribution operations under disruptions by integrating a Continuous Approximation (CA) based last-mile distribution model, the resilience triangle concept, and the Robustness, Redundancy, Resourcefulness, and Rapidity (R4) resilience framework. The proposed R4 Last Mile Distribution Resilience Triangle Framework is a novel performance-based qualitative-cum-quantitative domain-agnostic framework. Through a set of empirical analyses, this study highlights the opportunities and challenges of different distribution/outsourcing strategies to cope with disruption. In particular, the authors analyzed the use of an independent crowdsourced fleet (flexible service contingent on driver availability); the use of collection-point pickup (unconstrained downstream capacity contingent on customer willingness to self-collect); and integration with a logistics service provider (reliable service with high distribution costs). Overall, this work recommends that e-retailers create a suitable platform to ensure reliable crowdsourced deliveries, position sufficient collection points to ensure customer willingness to self-collect, and negotiate contracts with several logistics service providers to ensure adequate backup distribution.