This research asks how universality of ridership is maintained in New York City’s transit system given that it is gated by the fare. Transportation planning scholarship presumes transit is affordable because the fare has a relatively low price and ridership among the poor is high. The transit agency addresses universality by maintaining a fare structure that keeps the single ride fare relatively low. Its method is based on empirical evidence that low-income riders “prefer” cheaper fare products over those with lower average fares but that require higher initial cash outlays. Transportation scholarship observes that low-income riders are inelastic and presumes, based on economic theory, that riders will forego more elastic goods to ride transit. Critical planning scholars have contested the tenets of the modernist planning project which utilize predict-and-provide empiricism and neoclassical economic models such as these. While urban planning has turned toward direct collaboration or at least participation with affected communities, transportation planning has not fully made this turn. There is thus little transit-related research that is informed directly by riders, especially low-income riders, suggesting the conventional approaches to understanding how riders afford the fare are incomplete. To fill this void, this research engages with low-income transit riders to elaborate and challenge the explanations for universality of ridership. It finds that although the fare price is low, it is not necessarily affordable. The “preference” for single ride fares is in most cases the result of constraints. Single fare rides are often combined with fare evasion and exploitation of free transfers, while unlimited fare cards are highly sought and widely shared. Low-income riders are more likely to undertake compensating behaviors than to forego goods. On the occasions when they do forego goods, they compromise necessities such as food, telephone service, rent and laundry. Finally, agents of the welfare state distribute fares to low-income individuals to promote rehabilitation and labor force attachment. Together these findings suggest that universality of ridership is tenuous. It depends on fragmented systems of generosity, compromise and welfare of which transit advocates and planners are largely unaware. Fare evasion enforcement, pricing structures and fare payment methods can pose challenges to riders who rely on these fragmented systems. By explicitly acknowledging transit affordability, and incorporating knowledge on the role that welfare plays in enabling low-income ridership, planners can expand access to transit for low-income riders.

by Tse Kwong Keung. / Pages 52-56 and 74 in clear holder. / Thesis (M.B.A.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 1998. / Includes bibliographical references (leaf 99). / Questionnaries in English and Chinese. / ABSTRACT --- p.ii / TABLE OF CONTENTS --- p.ii / LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS --- p.v / LIST OF APPENDICES --- p.vi / LIST OF TABLES --- p.vii / LIST OF EXHIBITS --- p.ix / PREFACE --- p.x / Chapter / Chapter I. --- INTRODUCTION --- p.1 / Title of the Project --- p.1 / Terms of Reference --- p.1 / Objective --- p.2 / Chapter II. --- BACKGROUND --- p.4 / Overview of the Octopus System --- p.4 / Overview of the Octopus System Bus Equipment --- p.6 / Fare collection system on LRT Feeder and Auxiliary Bus Routes --- p.9 / Pre-Octopus Fare Collection System --- p.9 / New Fare Collection System with the Introduction of Octopus System --- p.10 / Implementation Measures --- p.11 / Implementation Measures to Prepare Passengers to Use Octopus System on Buses --- p.11 / Implementation measures - CSL --- p.11 / Implementation measures - LRT --- p.13 / Implementation Measures to Prepare Staff to Launch Octopus System on Buses --- p.14 / Chapter III. --- METHODOLOGY --- p.16 / Sources of Information --- p.16 / The Questionnaire Surveys --- p.17 / Questionnaire Survey for LRT Bus Passengers --- p.17 / Questionnaire Survey for LRT Bus Traffic Staff --- p.18 / Data Analysis Tools --- p.19 / Chapter IV. --- FINDINGS --- p.20 / Literature Review --- p.20 / The Systems Development Cycle --- p.20 / The Systems Development Cycle of Octopus System in LRT Buses --- p.24 / Systems Implementation Measures Getting People Ready to Use the New System --- p.25 / Measures of gaining acceptance by passengers and staff --- p.26 / Measures of obtaining passengers and staff performance --- p.29 / Education and training --- p.30 / Performance aids --- p.32 / Findings from Questionnaire Survey for LRT Bus Passengers --- p.33 / Demographic Profile --- p.33 / Effectiveness of Promotion Channels on Octopus Card to Passengers --- p.33 / Number of Trips on LRT Buses Per Week by Respondents --- p.34 / Fare Paying Methods of Respondents --- p.34 / Competence of Respondents in Using Octopus Card on Buses --- p.35 / Most Effective Methods to Educate Passengers on Octopus Card Usage --- p.36 / Findings from Questionnaire Survey for LRT Bus Traffic Staff --- p.36 / Demographic Profile --- p.36 / Personal Computer Experience Prior to Octopus Bus Equipment Training --- p.37 / Evaluation of DDU Operations Training Course --- p.37 / Staff Perceived Level of Competence to Operate the DDU During Octopus System Launching --- p.38 / Measures Proposed by Staff to Enhance Competence to Operate the DDU --- p.39 / Evaluation of BDC Operations Training Course --- p.39 / Staff Perceived Level of Competence to Operate the BDC During Octopus System Launching --- p.40 / Measures Proposed by Staff to Enhance Competence to Operate the BDC --- p.41 / Chapter V. --- CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS --- p.42 / Strengths of Implementation Measures on Passengers --- p.42 / Weaknesses of Implementation Measures on Passengers --- p.43 / Recommendations of Implementation Measures on Customers --- p.44 / Strengths of Implementation Measures on Staff --- p.46 / Weaknesses of Implementation Measures on Staff --- p.47 / Recommendations of Implementation Measures on Staff --- p.48 / APPENDICES 1-11 --- p.50 / TABLES 1-18 --- p.75 / EXHIBITS 1-6 --- p.93 / BIBLIOGRAPHY --- p.99

The Atlanta region will soon be faced with a choice as to how it will go about planning for and implementing its next regional fare collection system that will replace the current BREEZE system. In 2006, MARTA became the first transit agency in the United States to implement an all contactless smartcard for use on its services. However, there have been many advances in new technologies and the consumer payment preferences have evolved since the initial implementation. These developments, coupled with the rapid consumer adoption of smartphones and changing attitudes within the financial payments industry towards transit properties, have recently led four major transit agencies within North America to implement new fare collection systems based on open payments, the development of mobile ticketing applications, or a combination. This research uses a case study methodology to answer several questions related to the planning and implementation of regional fare collection systems in Chicago (CTA), Dallas (DART), Philadelphia (SEPTA) and Toronto (TTC). Based on the experience of the case study agencies, the implementation of Atlanta's next fare collection system is sure to be a long and arduous process. However, by utilizing the lessons learned from DART, CTA, SEPTA and TTC, MARTA and the other regional operators (Cobb Community Transit, Gwinnett County Transit and the Georgia Regional Transportation Authority) will be better poised to provide their patrons with additional means of paying fares while, at the same, minimizing the disruption to the existing fare collection system during the transition period.