LOCAL DECISIONS REGARDING PUBLIC TRANSPORT ALTERNATIVES

This thesis looks at the decision-making processes associated with choosing public transport alternatives in major cities. The choice is made either when routes are to be replaced or when new routes are to be implemented. The thesis is a case study where two bus cases and two light-rail cases were selected. These cases (cities) have the ability to choose and utilize a hybrid of alternatives. Contrary to initial beliefs, the researchers found that the alternative was not selected subsequent to rigorous evaluations, such as cost-benefit analyses, between several alternatives. Instead, it was chosen on the basis that the alternative was believed to be able to best solve the problem defined by the applicable authority and achieve the desired goals. The lowest cost possible was not found to be an important criterion. In neither case, two or more alternatives were evaluated, which contradicts the theory of rationality. Moreover, field trips proved to be a major determinant for choosing an alternative. Further, the interests of stakeholders were not established to affect the choices, and political will was established to be the single most important factor. The state subsidies of light rail were found to be crucial to its selection whereas they were not for buses. These state subsidies are believed to give light rail an unfair comparative advantage