IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transa/v43y2009i4p349-359.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Decision-making for light rail

Author

Listed:
  • De Bruijn, Hans
  • Veeneman, Wijnand

Abstract

In transport literature there is an ongoing discussion on the potential of light rail in mitigating congestion and supporting mobility around urban centres. Throughout Europe and the United States, many policy makers see light rail as an interesting option to improve the accessibility of urban centres. The Dutch national government wanted to support swift light rail realization in a number of promising situations. Several projects gained support from the national government for implementation. However, the decision-making on a local level was not nearly as swift as expected and not in line with the promise. This paper presents an analysis of that perceived slowdown and shows that the approach of the national government with a strict focus on light rail and a detachment from the local processes has played an important role in the slowdown. It shows that light rail can very well be a solid option. However, its successful implementation is not solely dependent on light rail suitability for the mobility patterns in the region, but very much on the approach of the implementation of those supporting the option.

Suggested Citation

  • De Bruijn, Hans & Veeneman, Wijnand, 2009. "Decision-making for light rail," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 349-359, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:43:y:2009:i:4:p:349-359
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0965-8564(08)00206-1
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jonathan Richmond, 2001. "A whole-system approach to evaluating urban transit investments," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(2), pages 141-179.
    2. Rubin, Thomas A. & Moore II, James E. & Lee, Shin, 1999. "Ten myths about US urban rail systems," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 57-73, January.
    3. Edwards, Marion & Mackett, Roger L, 1996. "Developing new urban public transport systems : An irrational decision-making process," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 225-239, October.
    4. Lane, Bradley W., 2008. "Significant characteristics of the urban rail renaissance in the United States: A discriminant analysis," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 279-295, February.
    5. Kain, John F. & Liu, Zvi, 1999. "Secrets of success: assessing the large increases in transit ridership achieved by Houston and San Diego transit providers," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 33(7-8), pages 601-624.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Niek Mouter & Paul Koster & Thijs Dekker, 2019. "Participatory Value Evaluation versus Cost-Benefit Analysis: comparing recommendations in the context of urban mobility investments," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 19-046/VIII, Tinbergen Institute, revised 27 Jan 2020.
    2. Kołoś, Arkadiusz & Taczanowski, Jakub, 2016. "The feasibility of introducing light rail systems in medium-sized towns in Central Europe," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 400-413.
    3. Mouter, Niek & Koster, Paul & Dekker, Thijs, 2021. "Contrasting the recommendations of participatory value evaluation and cost-benefit analysis in the context of urban mobility investments," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 54-73.
    4. Kevin Credit, 2018. "Transit-oriented economic development: The impact of light rail on new business starts in the Phoenix, AZ Region, USA," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 55(13), pages 2838-2862, October.
    5. Seidenglanz, Daniel & Kvizda, Martin & Nigrin, Tomáš & Tomeš, Zdeněk & Dujka, Jiří, 2016. "Czechoslovak light rail — Legacy of socialist urbanism or opportunity for the future?," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 414-429.
    6. Alpkokin, Pelin & Topuz Kiremitci, Sabahat & Black, John Andrew & Cetinavci, Sukru, 2016. "LRT and street tram policies and implementation in turkish cities," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 476-487.
    7. Olesen, Mette & Lassen, Claus, 2016. "Rationalities and materialities of light rail scapes," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 373-382.
    8. Galit Cohen-Blankshtain & Eran Feitelson, 2011. "Light rail routing: do goals matter?," Transportation, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 343-361, March.
    9. Kristian Olesen, 2020. "Infrastructure imaginaries: The politics of light rail projects in the age of neoliberalism," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(9), pages 1811-1826, July.
    10. Navarro-Ligero, Miguel L. & Valenzuela-Montes, Luis Miguel, 2022. "Scenario archetypes in urban transport planning: Insights from the implementation of LRT systems," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 152-164.
    11. Valenzuela-Montes, Luis M. & Soria-Lara, Julio A. & Navarro-Ligero, Miguel L., 2016. "Analysing stakeholders' perception of Light Rail Transit as an opportunity to achieve sustainable mobility in Granada (Spain)," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 391-399.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bradley Lane, 2011. "TAZ-level variation in work trip mode choice between 1990 and 2000 and the presence of rail transit," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 147-171, June.
    2. Lane, Bradley W., 2008. "Significant characteristics of the urban rail renaissance in the United States: A discriminant analysis," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 279-295, February.
    3. Brinkman, Anthony P., 2003. "The Ethical Challenges and Professional Responses of Travel Demand Forecasters," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt9c3330tt, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    4. Brinkman, P. Anthony, 2003. "The Ethical Challenges and Professional Responses of Travel Demand Forecasters," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt7vb2d17h, University of California Transportation Center.
    5. Kołoś, Arkadiusz & Taczanowski, Jakub, 2016. "The feasibility of introducing light rail systems in medium-sized towns in Central Europe," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 400-413.
    6. Brinkman, P. Anthony, 2003. "The Ethical Challenges and Professional Responses of Travel Demand Forecasters," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt6dv0z95g, University of California Transportation Center.
    7. Ted Balaker & Cecilia Joung Kim, 2006. "Do Economists Reach a Conclusion On Rail Transit?," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 3(3), pages 551-602, September.
    8. Galit Cohen-Blankshtain & Eran Feitelson, 2011. "Light rail routing: do goals matter?," Transportation, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 343-361, March.
    9. Brian Taylor & Eric Morris, 2015. "Public transportation objectives and rider demographics: are transit’s priorities poor public policy?," Transportation, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 347-367, March.
    10. G. Currie & A. Ahern & A. Delbosc, 2011. "Exploring the drivers of light rail ridership: an empirical route level analysis of selected Australian, North American and European systems," Transportation, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 545-560, May.
    11. Hamilton, Timothy L. & Wichman, Casey J., 2018. "Bicycle infrastructure and traffic congestion: Evidence from DC's Capital Bikeshare," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 72-93.
    12. Lindsey, Marshall & Schofer, Joseph L. & Durango-Cohen, Pablo & Gray, Kimberly A., 2010. "Relationship between proximity to transit and ridership for journey-to-work trips in Chicago," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 44(9), pages 697-709, November.
    13. Stanger, R., 2000. "Ten myths about US urban rail systems by Thomas Rubin, James Moore, and Shin Lee--a rejoinder," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 303-305, October.
    14. David Hensher & Thomas Golob, 2008. "Bus rapid transit systems: a comparative assessment," Transportation, Springer, vol. 35(4), pages 501-518, July.
    15. Lori Zeller, 2015. "Potential changes in transportation patterns of New York Islanders fans due to stadium relocation," Transportation, Springer, vol. 42(6), pages 951-966, November.
    16. Poudenx, Pascal, 2008. "The effect of transportation policies on energy consumption and greenhouse gas emission from urban passenger transportation," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 42(6), pages 901-909, July.
    17. Chen, Cynthia & Chen, Jason & Barry, James, 2009. "Diurnal pattern of transit ridership: a case study of the New York City subway system," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 176-186.
    18. Fullerton, Thomas M. Jr & Walke, Adam G., 2012. "Border Zone Mass Transit Demand in Brownsville and Laredo," Journal of the Transportation Research Forum, Transportation Research Forum, vol. 51(2).
    19. Diab, Ehab & Kasraian, Dena & Miller, Eric J. & Shalaby, Amer, 2020. "The rise and fall of transit ridership across Canada: Understanding the determinants," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 101-112.
    20. Rodier, Caroline & Shaheen, Susan A. & Blake, Tagan, 2010. "Smart Parking Pilot on the Coaster Commuter Rail Line in San Diego, California," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt06s723rw, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:43:y:2009:i:4:p:349-359. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.