IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/trapol/v111y2021icp17-27.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Improving quality of ordinary bus service in Kolkata city: Integrating conflicting requirements of users and transit operator

Author

Listed:
  • Cheranchery, Munavar Fairooz
  • Maitra, Bhargab

Abstract

The requirement of heavy subsidy and poor service quality are the two major concerns of ordinary bus services in Indian cities. Improving quality of ordinary service as per the requirements of users without putting undue burden on transit operator in terms of additional subsidy is a major challenge for policymakers. A six-stage methodology is demonstrated in the present work for the improvement of ordinary bus services by incorporating the requirements of users and operator. The methodology largely includes selection of attributes for econometric model, development of econometric model, fixing the range of attributes’ level for improvement, and development and simulation of alternative scenarios. Taking three ordinary bus routes in Kolkata city, several scenarios were investigated to provide recommendations under two different cases (improvement with and without fare increment). The findings indicate that the quality of service could be improved without any increment in fare or additional subsidy from the Government. Such an improvement could benefit both users and Government. The benefit to user could be augmented further with a marginal fare increment and reduced subsidy from the Government. Although the methodology is demonstrated with reference to Kolkata city, it could be applied in other cities for deriving city-specific service design and improvement of bus services.

Suggested Citation

  • Cheranchery, Munavar Fairooz & Maitra, Bhargab, 2021. "Improving quality of ordinary bus service in Kolkata city: Integrating conflicting requirements of users and transit operator," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 17-27.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:111:y:2021:i:c:p:17-27
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2021.07.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967070X21002080
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tranpol.2021.07.007?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Caussade, Sebastián & Ortúzar, Juan de Dios & Rizzi, Luis I. & Hensher, David A., 2005. "Assessing the influence of design dimensions on stated choice experiment estimates," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 621-640, August.
    2. Dandapat, Saurabh & Cheranchery, Munavar Fairooz & Maitra, Bhargab, 2017. "Is fare increment desirable for ensuring operational viability of private buses?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 134-141.
    3. Brownstone, David & Bunch, David S. & Train, Kenneth, 2000. "Joint mixed logit models of stated and revealed preferences for alternative-fuel vehicles," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 315-338, June.
    4. John C. Whitehead & Subhrendu K. Pattanayak & George L. Van Houtven & Brett R. Gelso, 2008. "Combining Revealed And Stated Preference Data To Estimate The Nonmarket Value Of Ecological Services: An Assessment Of The State Of The Science," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(5), pages 872-908, December.
    5. Li, Zheng & Hensher, David A., 2012. "Congestion charging and car use: A review of stated preference and opinion studies and market monitoring evidence," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 47-61.
    6. Train, Kenneth & Wilson, Wesley W., 2008. "Estimation on stated-preference experiments constructed from revealed-preference choices," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 191-203, March.
    7. Pucher, John & Korattyswaropam, Nisha & Mittal, Neha & Ittyerah, Neenu, 2005. "Urban transport crisis in India," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 185-198, May.
    8. Merkert, Rico & Mulley, Corinne & Hakim, Md Mahbubul, 2017. "Determinants of bus rapid transit (BRT) system revenue and effectiveness – A global benchmarking exercise," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 75-88.
    9. Masoumi, Houshmand E., 2019. "A discrete choice analysis of transport mode choice causality and perceived barriers of sustainable mobility in the MENA region," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 37-53.
    10. Cheranchery, Munavar Fairooz & Maitra, Bhargab, 2018. "Investigating perception of captive and choice riders for formulating service standards of ordinary and premium buses in Indian cities," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 89-96.
    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. Kar, Manaswinee & Sadhukhan, Shubhajit & Parida, Manoranjan, 2022. "Assessing commuters’ perceptions towards improvement of intermediate public transport as access modes to metro stations," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 140-155.
    2. Das, Deepjyoti & Bhaduri, Eeshan & Velaga, Nagendra R., 2023. "Modeling commuters’ preference towards sharing paratransit services," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 132-149.
    3. Deepa, L. & Pinjari, Abdul Rawoof & Nirmale, Sangram Krishna & Biswas, Mehek & Srinivasan, Karthik K., 2023. "The adverse impact of headway variability on bus transit ridership: Evidence from Bengaluru, India," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 343-356.

    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. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Conceptualisation of external validity, sources and explanations of bias and effectiveness of mitigation methods," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    2. Rashedi, Zohreh & Mahmoud, Mohamed & Hasnine, Sami & Habib, Khandker Nurul, 2017. "On the factors affecting the choice of regional transit for commuting in Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area: Application of an advanced RP-SP choice model," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 1-13.
    3. Milad Haghani & Michiel C. J. Bliemer & John M. Rose & Harmen Oppewal & Emily Lancsar, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part II. Macro-scale analysis of literature and effectiveness of bias mitigation methods," Papers 2102.02945, arXiv.org.
    4. Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M., 2011. "Experimental design influences on stated choice outputs: An empirical study in air travel choice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 63-79, January.
    5. Adelina Gschwandtner & Jose Eduardo Ribeiro & Cesar Revoredo-Giha & Michael Burton, 2021. "Combining Stated and Revealed Preferences for valuing Organic Chicken Meat," Studies in Economics 2113, School of Economics, University of Kent.
    6. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Rose, John M. & Oppewal, Harmen & Lancsar, Emily, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part I. Macro-scale analysis of literature and integrative synthesis of empirical evidence from applied economics, experimental psychology and neuroimag," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    7. Aurélie Glerum & Lidija Stankovikj & Michaël Thémans & Michel Bierlaire, 2014. "Forecasting the Demand for Electric Vehicles: Accounting for Attitudes and Perceptions," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(4), pages 483-499, November.
    8. Li, Zili & Washington, Simon P. & Zheng, Zuduo & Prato, Carlo G., 2023. "A Bayesian hierarchical approach to the joint modelling of Revealed and stated choices," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    9. Thijs Dekker & Paul Koster & Roy Brouwer, 2014. "Changing with the Tide: Semiparametric Estimation of Preference Dynamics," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 90(4), pages 717-745.
    10. Bujosa Bestard, Angel & Riera Font, Antoni, 2021. "Attribute range effects: Preference anomaly or unexplained variance?," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    11. Shenhao Wang & Qingyi Wang & Jinhua Zhao, 2019. "Multitask Learning Deep Neural Networks to Combine Revealed and Stated Preference Data," Papers 1901.00227, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2019.
    12. Sanko, Nobuhiro & Yamamoto, Toshiyuki, 2013. "Estimation efficiency of RP/SP models considering SP design and error structures," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 6(C), pages 60-73.
    13. Roy, Subhojit & Basu, Debasis, 2020. "Selection of intervention areas for improving travel condition of walk-accessed bus users with a focus on their accessibility: An experience in Bhubaneswar," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 29-39.
    14. Edenbrandt, Anna Kristina & Lagerkvist, Carl Johan & Nordström, Jonas, 2021. "Interested, indifferent or active information avoiders of carbon labels: Cognitive dissonance and ascription of responsibility as motivating factors," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    15. Mesa-Arango, Rodrigo & Ukkusuri, Satish V., 2014. "Attributes driving the selection of trucking services and the quantification of the shipper’s willingness to pay," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 142-158.
    16. John C. Whitehead & Daniel K. Lew, 2020. "Estimating recreation benefits through joint estimation of revealed and stated preference discrete choice data," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 58(4), pages 2009-2029, April.
    17. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    18. Stephane Hess & John Rose, 2012. "Can scale and coefficient heterogeneity be separated in random coefficients models?," Transportation, Springer, vol. 39(6), pages 1225-1239, November.
    19. Train, Kenneth & Wilson, Wesley W., 2008. "Estimation on stated-preference experiments constructed from revealed-preference choices," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 191-203, March.
    20. Milad Haghani & Michiel C. J. Bliemer & John M. Rose & Harmen Oppewal & Emily Lancsar, 2021. "Hypothetical bias in stated choice experiments: Part I. Integrative synthesis of empirical evidence and conceptualisation of external validity," Papers 2102.02940, arXiv.org.

    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:trapol:v:111:y:2021:i:c:p:17-27. 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/30473/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.