1976Unpublished venueRequires access

Public versus Private Transport

Chris Nash

Open publisher page 14 citations

Abstract

This book compares the economic and environmental characteristics of public and private transport modes, and reviews the potential for modifying modal split in each of the main sectors of the transport market. Opening with a review of the traditional track-cost argument on the relative merits of public and private transport, the author concludes that it is the comparison of costs and benefits of future infrastructure changes rather than historic revenue and cost comparisons that is relevant to the issue of choice of modal split. A consideration of the relative pollution and resource depletion caused by different modes furthers the conclusion that normal commercial criteria do not provide a good way of allocating resources in the transport sector. Alternative methods of modifying modal split are then considered. A chapter is devoted to each of the main sub-divisions of the transport market. On urban passenger transport it is concluded that a strategy based on major use of public transport rather than large-scale road building is feasible and has many advantages. In the inter-urban and rural passenger market, whilst there is evidence of resource misallocation the problem of how to deal with it is harder to resolve. Although much freight traffic is captive to road transport given patterns of institutions and land use - there is likely to be scope here too for beneficial changes not only in modal split but also more generally in methods of freight handling. The final conclusion is that it is only by looking at specific locations and specific traffics that the question of optimal division between public and private transport can be resolved. /TRRL/

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This book compares the economic and environmental characteristics of public and private transport modes, and reviews the potential for modifying modal split in each of the main sectors of the transport market. Opening with a review of the traditional track-cost argument on the relative merits of public and private transport, the author concludes that it is the comparison of costs and benefits of future infrastructure changes rather than historic revenue and cost comparisons that is relevant to the issue of choice of modal split. A consideration of the relative pollution and resource depletion caused by different modes furthers the conclusion that normal commercial criteria do not provide a good way of allocating resources in the transport sector. Alternative methods of modifying modal split are then considered. A chapter is devoted to each of the main sub-divisions of the transport market. On urban passenger transport it is concluded that a strategy based on major use of public transport rather than large-scale road building is feasible and has many advantages. In the inter-urban and rural passenger market, whilst there is evidence of resource misallocation the problem of how to deal with it is harder to resolve. Although much freight traffic is captive to road transport given patterns of institutions and land use - there is likely to be scope here too for beneficial changes not only in modal split but also more generally in methods of freight handling. The final conclusion is that it is only by looking at specific locations and specific traffics that the question of optimal division between public and private transport can be resolved. /TRRL/

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 14 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This book compares the economic and environmental characteristics of public and private transport modes, and reviews the potential for modifying modal split in each of the main sectors of the transport market. Opening with a review of the traditional track-cost argument on the relative merits of public and private transport, the author concludes that it is the comparison of costs and benefits of future infrastructure changes rather than historic revenue and cost comparisons that is relevant to the issue of choice of modal split. A consideration of the relative pollution and resource depletion caused by different modes furthers the conclusion that normal commercial criteria do not provide a good way of allocating resources in the transport sector. Alternative methods of modifying modal split are then considered. A chapter is devoted to each of the main sub-divisions of the transport market. On urban passenger transport it is concluded that a strategy based on major use of public transport rather than large-scale road building is feasible and has many advantages. In the inter-urban and rural passenger market, whilst there is evidence of resource misallocation the problem of how to deal with it is harder to resolve. Although much freight traffic is captive to road transport given patterns of institutions and land use - there is likely to be scope here too for beneficial changes not only in modal split but also more generally in methods of freight handling. The final conclusion is that it is only by looking at specific locations and specific traffics that the question of optimal division between public and private transport can be resolved. /TRRL/

Key concepts: Business

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Public versus Private Transport — Research Paper | ScholarLens