Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

The public transport myth

By Alan Moran - posted Tuesday, 24 October 2006


Undeterred, to approach its goals, the government has set out a Plan (Meeting our transport challenges). Over the coming decade, this allocates for Melbourne about $6,035 million for transit and $2,155 million for roads.

Thus, the car, comprising 92 per cent of the motorised market and contributing a massive net revenue in taxation, is to be outspent almost 3:1 by transit which currently has 8 per cent of the market and in the widely optimistic forecast of The Plan might have 15 per cent.

Transit’s ability to meet consumers’ needs

In spite of public transport benefiting from massive subsidies, the coverage of its ability to carry people to their destinations quickly is highly restricted. Add to this the convenience in leaving home or work when you wish, and comfort, and the task confronting transit becomes colossal.

Advertisement

The problem is graphically demonstrated by the government in the following map of the accessibility of jobs in Melbourne by car and transit.

The map is designed as ammunition for those seeking to boost transit spending, but actually it merely shows the enormity, the impossibility, of the task of forcing more people off cars and on to transit. A casual examination of the dark and light areas illustrates the magnitude of the task in reversing the on-going trend away from transit uses.

Compared to public transport, people find cars to be more convenient and lower cost. Importantly, transit finds itself on the wrong side of history. It can only operate effectively in urban conditions and only really effectively in urban areas with high densities and concentrated origin and destination points. A rule of thumb is that, to be commercially viable, rail-based systems require 40,000 people per square kilometer and express bus systems 25,000.

Melbourne has an average density of 1,500 and reaches a maximum of 5,500 only in the densest suburb. Transit’s disadvantages are compounded by the changing nature of cities themselves. Less than 50 years ago, 55 per cent of Melbourne’s jobs were in the central area. Today, it is 28 per cent and only 10 per cent work in the area we call the Central Business District. Work locations, which were once dictated by the availability of mass transit and tended to be located in the central areas of the city, are now becoming far more dispersed.

This is partly due to the nature of work itself - far more is undertaken at diffuse locations because of a reduction in factory sizes, telecommunications advances and a shift towards services that do not require traditional employee concentrations.

Advertisement

It also reflects people’s preferences - a great many people, even those with access to free transit travel, choose to use their cars because they are more convenient.

Transport as a service

Transport is a derived demand. In other words, not many people get in their car or hop on a tram just for the pleasure of doing so. People use transport to get from A to B. They wish to do so as quickly as possible with constraints on price and comfort, and so on. This did not appear to have been a priority for the Victorian Government that identified problems of transport in Melbourne 2030, which instead focused on equity, pollution and the like.

The root cause of any transport problems we have is this determination to give people what the government and certain elites think is good for them rather than what they themselves want. Such arrogant dismissal of people’s own preferences is an endemic problem with urban planning.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. All

First published in the IPA Review on October 1, 2006.

Advertisement
 Institute of Public Affairs Advertisement

 

Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

91 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Alan Moran is the principle of Regulatory Economics.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Alan Moran

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Alan Moran
Article Tools
Comment 91 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Latest from Institute of Public Affairs
 No reality holiday from this population challenge
 For budgets only smaller is tougher
 Government subsidies to green groups must end
 Boot-strapping on a carbon tax
 West's history not complete without reference to Christianity
 More...
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy