Evaluation of public transport: regional policies and planning practices in Sweden

Abstract This paper analyses regional public transport planning in Sweden. The aim is to provide an insight into how policy objectives are translated into action and to investigate how public transport measures are evaluated. The analysis is based on interviews with civil servants in five Swedish regions. Cost-benefit analysis is sparsely used (if ever) and the results further indicate that planning and evaluation of public transport is to a large extent centred around monitoring on-going trends, e.g. patronage and market share. Such information seems policy-relevant, i.e. is commonly asked for by the political level. The informants do ask for more knowledge regarding various effects (mainly social). However, it is less certain whether or not this knowledge would be used for economic evaluation. Regional and local public transport systems are complex, and intrinsically linked to land use and long-term regional ambitions. Instead of asking how public transport planning should be carried out, following CBA analyses, we should perhaps ask how the economic analysis could be tuned so that it becomes relevant for public transport planning. We foresee that the broader role of the public transport system will increase goal conflicts between, and within, authorities.

[1]  Anders Ljungberg,et al.  Public Transport Authorities’ use of Cost-Benefit Analysis in practice , 2018, Research in Transportation Economics.

[2]  H. Antonson,et al.  Layering and parallel policy making – Complementary concepts for understanding implementation challenges related to sustainable mobility , 2017 .

[3]  Vanessa Stjernborg,et al.  The Role of Public Transport in Society : A Case Study of General Policy Documents in Sweden , 2016 .

[4]  Fredrik Pettersson,et al.  The Qualities Needed for a Successful Collaboration: A Contribution to the Conceptual Understanding of Collaboration for Efficient Public Transport , 2016 .

[5]  J. P. Bocarejo,et al.  Social fragmentation as a consequence of implementing a Bus Rapid Transit system in the city of Bogotá , 2016 .

[6]  Soo Chen Kwan,et al.  A review on co-benefits of mass public transportation in climate change mitigation , 2016 .

[7]  Patrick Moriarty,et al.  Reducing levels of urban passenger travel , 2016 .

[8]  C. Macharis,et al.  Sustainable Consensus? The NISTO Evaluation Framework to Appraise Sustainability and Stakeholder Preferences for Mobility Projects , 2016 .

[9]  Thorsten Gerber,et al.  Practising Human Geography , 2016 .

[10]  Maria Börjesson,et al.  Does Benefit-Cost Efficiency Influence Transport Investment Decisions? , 2015 .

[11]  Valentina Basaric,et al.  Efficient Methodology for Assessment of Targets and Policy Measures for Sustainable Mobility Systems , 2015 .

[12]  Till Koglin,et al.  Organisation does matter – planning for cycling in Stockholm and Copenhagen , 2015 .

[13]  Niek Mouter,et al.  Cost-benefit Analysis (CBA), or Multi-criteria Decision-making (MCDM) or Both: Politicians’ Perspective in Transport Policy Appraisal , 2015 .

[14]  Cathy Macharis,et al.  Reviewing the Use of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for the Evaluation of Transport Projects: Time for a Multi-Actor Approach , 2015 .

[15]  S. Proost,et al.  Is sustainable transport policy sustainable , 2015 .

[16]  Anders Wretstrand,et al.  Converging structures? Recent regulatory change in bus-based local public transport in Sweden and England , 2014 .

[17]  Till Koglin,et al.  The marginalisation of bicycling in Modernist urban transport planning , 2014 .

[18]  Maria Börjesson,et al.  Land-use impacts in transport appraisal , 2014 .

[19]  Jonas Eliasson,et al.  Transport appraisal revisited , 2014 .

[20]  Robert B. Noland,et al.  Residential Property Valuations near Transit Stations with Transit-Oriented Development , 2014 .

[21]  Steinar Kvale,et al.  Den kvalitativa forskningsintervjun , 2014 .

[22]  Jane C. Bare,et al.  Development of impact assessment methodologies for environmental sustainability , 2014, Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy.

[23]  R. Cervero.  Transport infrastructure and the environment: Sustainable mobility and urbanism , 2013 .

[24]  T. Richardson,et al.  Innovations for sustainable public transport: Experiences and challenges in the Scandinavian countries , 2013 .

[25]  Christer Persson,et al.  Deliberation or doctrine? Land use and spatial planning for sustainable development in Sweden , 2013 .

[26]  Daniel Johnson,et al.  The wider value of rural rail provision , 2013 .

[27]  B. Wee,et al.  Ranking the substantive problems in the Dutch Cost–Benefit Analysis practice , 2013 .

[28]  A. Nordlund,et al.  Influence of values, beliefs, and age on intention to travel by a new railway line under construction in northern Sweden , 2013 .

[29]  T. Koglin.  Vélomobility - A critical analysis of planning and space , 2013 .

[30]  S. Visram.  Interpreting interviews , 2012 .

[31]  A. Grindlay,et al.  Spatial disparity in transport social needs and public transport provision in Santiago de Cali (Colombia) , 2012 .

[32]  K. Lucas.  Transport and social exclusion: Where are we now? , 2012 .

[33]  Paolo Beria,et al.  Multicriteria versus Cost Benefit Analysis: a comparative perspective in the assessment of sustainable mobility , 2012 .

[34]  André de Palma,et al.  A Handbook of Transport Economics , 2011 .

[35]  B. Wee.  Transport and Ethics , 2011 .

[36]  L. Ryan,et al.  Comparative analysis of evaluation techniques for transport policies , 2011 .

[37]  P. Jackson.  Governance by numbers: what have we learned over the past 30 years? , 2011 .

[38]  Peter Mackie,et al.  Cost-Benefit Analysis in Transport , 2010 .

[39]  Local public transport on the basis of social economic criteria , 2010 .

[40]  R. Cervero,et al.  Bus Rapid Transit Impacts on Land Uses and Land Values in Seoul, Korea , 2009 .

[41]  P. Draper.  Reflexive methodology - new vistas for qualitative research: Media Reviews , 2008 .

[42]  David Banister,et al.  The sustainable mobility paradigm , 2008 .

[43]  Roger Vickerman,et al.  Transit investment and economic development , 2008 .

[44]  K. Small,et al.  Should Urban Transit Subsidies Be Reduced? , 2007 .

[45]  T. Haêkkinen.  Trends and indicators for monitoring the EU thematic strategy on sustainable development of urban environment: final report: summary and recommendations , 2007 .

[46]  A. Hasan,et al.  Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development , 2007 .

[47]  David Banister,et al.  How to design a more sustainable and fairer built environment: transport and communications , 2006 .

[48]  Gerhard Larsson,et al.  Spatial Planning Systems in Western Europe: An Overview , 2006 .

[49]  J. Kenworthy.  The eco-city: ten key transport and planning dimensions for sustainable city development , 2006 .

[50]  D. Banister.  Unsustainable Transport: City Transport in the New Century , 2005 .

[51]  Cheng-Wei Lin,et al.  Multi-criteria analysis of alternative-fuel buses for public transportation , 2005 .

[52]  H. Rubin,et al.  Qualitative Interviewing (2nd ed.): The Art of Hearing Data , 2005 .

[53]  Anders Ljungberg.  Empirical evidence of the non-use of cost-benefit analysis in Swedish local/regional public transport , 2003 .

[54]  Thomas J. Sullivan,et al.  Methods of Social Research , 2000 .

[55]  Amartya Sen,et al.  The Discipline of Cost‐Benefit Analysis , 2000, The Journal of Legal Studies.

[56]  John Nellthorp,et al.  Transport project appraisal in the European Union , 2000 .

[57]  P. Chisnall.  Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data , 1996 .

[58]  S. Kvale,et al.  InterViews: Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research Interviewing , 1996 .

[59]  K. Bailey.  Methods of Social Research , 1978 .