transport

Could free public transport inspire sustainable travel?

All around the world cities are struggling with traffic congestion, and with the associated delays, carbon emissions and air pollution. Behind every traffic jam are thousands of personal decisions about how people are going to travel. The more people choose public transport, the fewer traffic jams and the less pollution there will be. But how do you get people to give up their cars?

A growing number of cities are turning to what looks like an obvious solution: make public transport free. It would entice people onto buses and trams, and it has the added benefit of democratizing public transport and making sure that nobody is excluded. in several cities earlier this year, but already have free transport in one form or another. Here’s a small selection:

  • is the one of the best known. The Estonian capital offers free public transport to local residents, paid for in part by the high number of paying visitors and tourists.
  • Geneva does it the other way round, and offers tourists a free public transport card for the length of their stay. This encourages visitors to leave their cars behind.
  • Melbourne has free tram transport in the city centre, a deliberate effort to discourage people from driving into the city. also discourages driving in its downtown business district by laying on free wifi-enabled LPG powered buses.
  • Singapore made bus travel on key commuter routes . This encouraged more people to go to work earlier, and reduced pressure on the transport network during the rush hour.
  • As my parents regularly remind me, over 60s get free bus travel in Britain. London offers free bus travel to children and teenagers.

Of course, there’s no such thing as ‘free’ public transport. It’s just not paid for through the traditional method of charging riders for a ticket. Most of these free schemes are subsidised by local government, and because of that they’re quite precarious. Britain has had several examples of free bus services that have fallen foul of budget cuts and introduced fares – here’s that used to serve students. Should we be relying on governments, national or local, to be paying for transport?

Before we jump too quickly to say no, it’s worth remembering that car drivers don’t pay the full cost of their transport choices either. The costs of congestion, pollution, accidents and climate change are all externalised. Governments often pay for roads and maintenance, parking and policing. Everybody’s getting a subsidy one way or another. Why not price in more of the full cost of driving, and use it to encourage public transport?

Government doesn’t have to be the only way to pay for it either. Hybrid funding models can draw on sponsorship and advertising. Business districts or universities might want to pay for transport that serves their areas. And funds can be tied directly to cars: Baltimore’s ‘‘ was designed as a low-emissions free bus service paid for by higher parking charges. In Hasselt, Belgium, plans for a bypass were scrapped and the money spent on making buses free instead. They ran free before rising costs brought fares back in.

Does it work? Evidence is mixed. Talinn found that the people most likely to use the free bus were not car drivers but pedestrians. The number of bus riders rose, the number of walkers fell – but 10% of drivers did switch to the bus, which made enough of a difference for the scheme to be judged a success. In fact, Estonia is planning to follow Talinn’s lead and make a network. In other places, bus travel soared and there’s no question that it worked. But since there are many models for funding and operating free travel, and many different goals – from reduced rush hour traffic to social inclusion to air pollution – there’s no one way to assess success.

Since there are so many overlapping social and environmental benefits of free public transport though, I expect we will hear more about it in future.

6 comments

  1. Free travel is a gift to landowners. The availability of the free travel is reflected in rents. Without LVT, this is a reverse-Robin Hood policy.

    There are “free” ferries in Sweden, originally introduced to help poor island fishing communities get to work on the mainland. The free ferries now give access to what has become the most expensive residential land in the country, all paid for by the poorest in the land.

  2. You are right that car (and lorry) drivers do not pay for all the resultant (externalised) costs. Although I enjoy driving, I’ve long thought that extra taxes should be added to fuel (hence they cannot be avoided) to cover all the side effects of motoring (and also to provide third party insurance for all drivers, so no one can not have it). Then those that do most miles / burn most fuel pay more…and those that do tiny mileages pay little.

  3. Efficiency is a more attractive incentive than cost if you want to encourage residents to patronize public transport. Keeping to scheduled departure and arrival time are very important. Attached to this is the availability of parking and cost to users who want to park in the transport hub and ride on public transport.

  4. Very good points and I don’t think car drivers often think about the price they don’t pay for their driving or owning a car. We often forget what the government pays for and I think free or even cheaper public transport prices could help, although making public transport more convenient for everybody could be helpful as well!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. .