Transport pricing and accessibility

Latest From Brookings

A common criticism of urban transport strategies is that they are unduly concerned with mobility or the ability to move rather than accessibility in which a desired journey purpose can be satisfied. It is often further argued that a consequence of this focus on mobility, particularly motorized mobility, is that transport is not affordable to the poor, and that this exclusion justified the use of subsidies to remedy the situation. A key element of “Moving to Access” is thus concerned with increasing the affordability of transport for the poor. The objective of this paper is to explore the relationships between mobility, accessibility, affordability and transport prices and subsidies in more detail with a view to better reconciling the economic efficiency of the urban transport systems with the welfare of the poor. That generates three main areas of inquiry, namely:


The approach to accessibility
The approach to affordability through transport subsidy
The reconciliation of efficiency pricing with equityconsiderations.
While there is a long history of theoretical and practical discussion of transport pricing and subsidies, there are a number of factors that call for further review and reconsideration. Among those factors are the increasing use of cash transfers and conditional cash transfers as a redistributional mechanism and the advances in information technology that enhance targeting of subsidies. In addition, the uptake of pricing strategies to address congestion and environmental effects raises concerns regarding equity and the impact on accessibility of low-income households. This paper takes these factors into consideration in updating the theoretical as well as practical application of pricing instruments. It offers a framework for assessing alternative pricing strategies and indicates areas for further investigation. The policy conclusions may be briefly encapsulated. First, accessibility is preferable to mobility as a policy objective but it is not necessarily more pro-poor than focusing on mobility, unless accompanied by other measures such as land ...

Read More