Citation

Cervero R, Guerra E. Public Works Manag. Policy 2011; 16(2): 111-128.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2011, SAGE Publishing)

DOI

10.1177/1087724X10397379

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

The debate over the costs and benefits of rail passenger transit is lively, deep, and often ideological. As with most polemical debates, the truth probably lies somewhere in the middle of extreme views. Some rail systems have benefits that outweigh their costs, while others do not. Applying a commonly used transit-fare price elasticity to 24 of the largest light and heavy rail systems in the United States and Puerto Rico, assuming a linear demand curve, and accounting for a counterfactual scenario, we find that just over half of the systems have net social benefits. Although Los Angeles' rail system does not "pass" our back-of-the-envelope cost--benefit analysis, as the network expands, it will begin to mimic the regional spatial coverage and connectivity of its chief competitor--the auto-freeway system--and approach the fare recovery rates of other large, dense American cities.