The economics of potential reduction of the rural road system in Kansas.

Benefit–cost analysis was used to examine the question of road closure in three Kansas counties (Brown County, Pratt County, and Thomas County). The cost of road closure is the additional travel cost of rural residents due to more circuitous routing to their destinations. The benefit is the avoided maintenance costs of roads removed from the county network. In the three counties, 10 road segments were selected as potential candidates for simulated closure. This was done to analyze the traffic impacts on alternative roads near the road segments being considered for simulated closure. Selection of the road segments was based on many factors, but the most important criterion was the traffic volume on these roads. TransCAD maps and Kansas Department of Transportation (KDOT) traffic counts were used to identify candidate roads for simulated closure. Single-access roads (the only road between a specific origin and destination) were not considered for simulated closure. A major conclusion is that rural counties will be able to save money by closing some relatively low-volume roads and redirecting the savings toward increasing the quality of the other county roads. Counties with relatively extensive road systems (miles of road per square mile) and relatively high population density (i.e., Brown County) are less likely to realize savings from road closure. Counties with less extensive road systems and relatively low population density (i.e., Thomas County) are more likely to realize significant savings from closure of relatively low-volume roads.