Public transit performance: what does one learn from frontier studies?

• Type: Article in International Scientific Journal
• Date: 2002

Authors

Bruno De Borger (Author) Other; Kristiaan Kerstens (Author) Other; Álvaro Costa (Author) FEUP

Journal

Title: Transport Reviews

Vol. 22 No. 1

Pages: 1-38

ISSN: 0144-1647

Publisher: Taylor & Francis

Indexing

ISI Proceedings

ISI Web of Knowledge - 140 Citations

Scopus - 173 Citations

Scientific classification

FOS: Engineering and technology > Other engineering and technologies

CORDIS: Social sciences > Economics > Transport economics

Other information

Authenticus ID: P-000-S1T

DOI: 10.1080/01441640010020313

Abstract (EN): This paper provides a comprehensive survey of the literature on production and cost frontiers for public transit operators, and it evaluates the contributions of frontier analysis to the understanding of the performance of the public transport sector. The authors first succinctly contrast best practice (or frontier) and average practice specifications of technology. They also review relevant performance indicators and the methods to measure them. Next, the existing frontier studies measuring urban transit performance are systematically summarized and critically assessed. It is shown that the organization of the market, contract design, the degree and nature of the regulatory regime, and the characteristics of the network being served are all important determinants of inefficiency. However, although the frontier literature has substantially contributed to the knowledge of urban transit technologies and the determinants of performance, it is found that many important issues remain unresolved.

Language: English

Type (Professor's evaluation): Scientific

Notes: References: Berechman, J., (1993); Bhattacharyya, A., Kumbhakar, S., Bhattacharyya, A., Ownership structure and cost efficiency: A study of publicly owned passenger-bus transportation companies in India (1995); Button, K., Costa, A., Economic efficiency gains from urban public transport regulatory reform: Two case studies of changes in Europe (1999); Chang, K.-P., Kao, P.-H., The relative efficiency of public versus private municipal bus firms: An application of data envelopment analysis (1992); Chu, X., Fielding, G., Lamar, B., Measuring transit performance using data envelopment analysis (1992); Costa, A., Public transport efficiency and effectiveness: Metro de Madrid (1998); Costa, A., Markellos, R.N., Evaluating public transport efficiency with neural network models (1997); Cowie, J., Asenova, D., Organisation form, scale effects and efficiency in the British bus industry (1999); De Borger, B., The economic environment and public enterprise behaviour: Belgian railroads, 1950-1986 (1993); De Borger, B., Kerstens, K., The performance of bus transit operators (2000); De Jong, G., Cheung, F., Stochastic frontier models for public transport (1999); Delhausse, B., Perelman, S., Thiry, B., Substituabilité partielle des facteurs et efficacité-coût: l'example des transports urbain et vicinal Belges (1992); Färe, R., Grosskopf, S., Lovell, C.A.K., (1994); Farrell, M., The measurement of productive efficiency (1957); Fazioli, R., Filippini, M., Prioni, P., Cost-structure and efficiency of local public transport: The case of Emilia Romagna bus companies (1993); Filippini, M., Maggi, R., Prioni, P., Inefficiency in a regulated industry: The case of Swiss regional bus companies (1992); Forsund, F., A comparison of parametric and non-parametric measures: The case of Norwegian ferries (1992); Gathon, H.-J., Indicators of partial productivity and technical efficiency in the European urban transit sector (1989); Glaister, S., Deregulation and privatisation: British experience (1997); Glaister, S., Starkie, D., Thompson, D., The assessment: Economic policy for transport (1990); Good, D., Nadiri, M., Röller, L.-H., Sickles, R., Efficiency and productivity growth comparisons of European and US air carriers: A first look at the data (1993); Greene, W., Frontier production functions (1997); Grosskopf, S., Statistical inference and non-parametric efficiency: A selective survey (1996); Hanusch, H., Cantner, U., (1991); Jara Diaz, S.R., (1982); Kerstens, K., (1996); Kerstens, K., (1999); Kerstens, K., Vanden Eeckaut, P., (1995); Kumbhakar, S., Bhattacharyya, A., (1996); Levaggi, R., (1994); Lijesen, M., (1998); Lovell, C.A.K., (1993); Loizides, I., Giahalis, B., (1995); Mackie, P., Preston, J., Nash, C., (1995); Marchand, M., Pestieau, P., Tulkens, H., (1984); Matas, A., Raymond, J.-L., (1998); Nolan, J.F., (1996); Nolan, J.F., Ritchie, P.C., Rowcroft, J.E., (2001); Nollet, C., Thiry, B., Tulkens, H., (1988); Obeng, K., (1994); Obeng, K., (1995); Oum, T.H., Thretheway, M., Waters II, W.G., (1992); Oum, T.H., Waters II, W.G., (1996); Oum, T.H., Waters II, W.G., Yu, C., (1999); Perry, J., Babitsky, T., Gregersen, H., (1988); Pestieau, P., Tulkens, H., (1993); Pucher, J., (1988); Rees, R., (1984); Sakano, R., Obeng, K., (1995); Sakano, R., Obeng, K., Azam, G., (1997); Schinnar, A., (1993); Spady, R., Friedlaender, A., (1978); Thiry, B., Tulkens, H., (1992); Tone, K., Sawada, T., (1990); Tulkens, H., (1993); Tulkens, H., Thiry, B., Palm, A., (1988); Tulkens, H., Vanden Eeckaut, P., (1995); Tulkens, H., Wunsch, P.,(1994); Viton, P., (1986); Viton, P., (1992); Viton, P.,(1993); Viton, P., (1997); Viton, P., (1998) ; Wunsch, P., (1994); Wunsch, P., (1996)

No. of pages: 38