Comprehensive Evaluation of Rail Transit Benefits
Todd Litman, Todd Alexander Litman
Abstract
Todd Litman, Todd Alexander Litman
Abstract
This report evaluates rail transit benefits based on a comprehensive analysis of urban transportation system performance in major U.S. cities. It discusses best practices for evaluating transit benefits. It finds that cities with larger, well-established rail systems have significantly higher per capita transit ridership, lower average per capita vehicle ownership and mileage, less traffic congestion, lower traffic death rates and lower consumer transportation expenditures than otherwise comparable cities. This indicates that rail transit systems can provide a variety of economic, social and environmental benefits, and benefits tend to increase as a system expands and matures. This analysis indicates that rail investments can be a cost effective way to improve urban transport. Parking, vehicle and congestion cost savings from rail transit are estimated to exceed total U.S. public transit subsidies. It critiques Great Rail Disasters (O’Toole, 2004), a report which argued that rail transit systems fail to achieve their objectives and are not cost effective. It finds that many claims in Great Rail Disasters are inaccurate, based on
OpenAlex reports 3 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
This report evaluates rail transit benefits based on a comprehensive analysis of urban transportation system performance in major U.S. cities. It discusses best practices for evaluating transit benefits. It finds that cities with larger, well-established rail systems have significantly higher per capita transit ridership, lower average per capita vehicle ownership and mileage, less traffic congestion, lower traffic death rates and lower consumer transportation expenditures than otherwise comparable cities. This indicates that rail transit systems can provide a variety of economic, social and environmental benefits, and benefits tend to increase as a system expands and matures. This analysis indicates that rail investments can be a cost effective way to improve urban transport. Parking, vehicle and congestion cost savings from rail transit are estimated to exceed total U.S. public transit subsidies. It critiques Great Rail Disasters (O’Toole, 2004), a report which argued that rail transit systems fail to achieve their objectives and are not cost effective. It finds that many claims in Great Rail Disasters are inaccurate, based on
Key concepts: Transport engineering, Subsidy, Public transport, Per capita, Traffic congestion, Transit (satellite), Business, Cost–benefit analysis