A New Approach to Rural Public Transport
Chapter 1: Introduction
CfIT's interest in rural transport
1.1 In 2002, CfIT examined the use of public subsidy in the bus industry. That research considered the cost-effectiveness of traditional bus services in rural areas and concluded that in deep rural areas, standard and experimental bus services have higher subsidy costs per passenger than taxis (LEK Consulting, 2002).
1.2 Further examination was recommended to determine the funding, regulatory and management issues associated with operating a taxi-based scheme, and the implementation barriers that would need to be overcome.
1.3 In 2007, CfIT began a programme of work examining how the travel needs of rural communities were being met by public transport services in both the UK and mainland Europe. Our focus widened from taxis to include any service that either complemented or replaced conventional bus services. We were keen to understand the quality and cost-effectiveness of a range of schemes and the scope for transferring those schemes across rural areas.
Our aim
1.4 We set out to understand whether it might be possible to provide better public transport services in rural areas than is generally the case today. We were particularly interested in how taxis and other non-conventional services might be used to provide a step-change in the availability and quality of public transport services for the general public in rural areas, whilst still achieving value for money.
1.5 Our interest in opportunities to improve rural public transport chimes with a recent series of reports from the Commission for Rural Communities, which highlighted the urgent need to find new solutions to the transport problems faced by rural communities (Commission for Rural Communities, 2008b)[1].
Scope of the CfIT study
1.6 Our study included examples from the UK and mainland Europe, and examined the economics of the schemes, the costs to passengers, levels of public subsidy, and the wider social and environmental benefits.
1.7 The scope of the work included:
- taxis (hackney carriages and private hire vehicles) in their roles as adjuncts to or replacements for conventional public transport[2], registered local bus services, both commercial, and subsidised by local authorities, Community Transport (CT) and special needs transport, and brokerage schemes;
- the combination of services best suited to meeting needs in different types of rural areas;
- issues of social inclusion, the needs of disabled people, and people on low incomes; and
- the combination of public transport services that might have the greatest potential to achieve sustainability, including lower emissions by better matching vehicle size to demand, and influencing the travel choices of rural car drivers.
Working methodology
1.8 This project is based upon a number of sources, including desktop research of publicly available data and primary research involving case studies and stakeholder consultation. The following pieces of evidence are available from the CfIT website (cfit.independent.gov.uk).
- Think piece on the role of taxis and private hire vehicles in rural areas (Mulley, 2007). This report, based on existing literature, includes an analysis of the current licensing rules and practices for local bus services, CT, and special bus and taxi licences and various shared vehicle schemes. The report proposes a framework in which the rural bus market could function more efficiently and be in a better position to meet the needs of transport-disadvantaged groups in rural areas.
- The Role of Taxis in Rural Public Transport (Mott MacDonald, 2008). CfIT commissioned new research to examine taxi-based services in operation in rural areas. This analysis included a literature review on taxi services, case studies of taxi-based schemes from the UK and mainland Europe, and consultation with operators, funders and stakeholders. The complete Mott MacDonald evidence base is available from the CfIT website.
- Think piece on the role played by alternative forms of transport in rural areas to 'meet the gap' between taxis and conventional buses in rural areas (Mulley, 2008). This report, based on existing literature, supplemented by interviews with representatives from the not-for-profit sector, includes an analysis of the current licensing rules and practices for flexible transport services. The report specifically considers the role of the not-for-profit sector in providing wider access in rural areas, and considers different brokerage options.
1.9 This report represents the views of the Commission for Integrated Transport (CfIT), which in 2007 established for this task a Working Group of CfIT Commissioners as well as other relevant individuals (see Annex 3 for a list of the Working Group members).
Glossary
1.10 The following list provides a brief definition of terms frequently referred to within the body of this report.
- Car sharing: An arrangement whereby two or more people share a car journey - either as part of an organised scheme that matches drivers and passengers, or an informal arrangement of family, friends or colleagues who agree amongst themselves to share car journeys on an ad hoc basis.
- Community transport (CT): Transport services provided to groups who have difficulty using conventional services because those services may be infrequent, unavailable, or physically inaccessible. CT services offer door-to-door transport or opportunities for onward travel through connections with conventional bus and rail. These transport services tend to be operated by not-for-profit community groups, though local authorities, health authorities and schools/colleges can all provide community transport services.
- Demand-responsive transport (DRT): Any form of transport where day-to-day service provision is influenced by the demands of users. In the UK these tend to be small-scale, for a defined region or specific community of people, and be door-todoor. This can include services offered by taxis, private hire vehicles (mini-cabs), buses, or community transport schemes.
- Hackney carriage: A public transport vehicle with no more than eight passenger seats, which is licensed to ply for hire. This means that it may stand at ranks or be hailed in the street by members of the public.
- Private hire vehicle (PHV): A vehicle that must have no more than eight passenger seats and requires advance booking by customers through an operator (may not ply for hire in the street).
- TaxiPlus: Large-scale shared taxi-based operations, involving a fleet of small vehicles, which, in addition to core operation, operate a bookable, shared, demand-responsive public transport service. The service utilises a centrally operated call centre to take passenger bookings, integrating with local bus, rail, and other transport networks to ensure connectivity and seamless travel.
Evidence
1.11 Our evidence is drawn from a range of sources and, despite our best efforts to put data and figures on as common a basis as possible, there will inevitably be some inconsistencies. While we may not be able to claim robustness for all estimates, particularly the financial data between schemes within the UK and mainland Europe, we think, nevertheless, that it is possible to make comparisons and draw broad conclusions from the evidence available.
1.12 In undertaking this analysis, our review of published literature highlighted some gaps in existing data and understanding:
- Better information collection is necessary on the financial costs and benefits of schemes. This needs to be collected on a consistent basis so that funding bodies and operators can consider the business case more effectively.
- Long-term research is crucial to our understanding of the cost-effectiveness of schemes.
- Research needs to examine the attitudes and behaviours of transport users in order to get the best value.
- Research needs to have an international component.
Structure of this report
1.13 Notwithstanding the limitations highlighted above, we believe there are some key insights into the role that transport which is responsive to demand can play in meeting the transport needs of rural communities. These insights and recommendations are set out in this report as follows:
Chapter 2: Government policy
Chapter 3: The challenges for rural public transport
Chapter 4: What we found in the study
Chapter 5: The economics of TaxiPlus schemes
Chapter 6: Why don't we have more TaxiPlus services here?
Chapter 7: Why do we think more TaxiPlus services are a good idea?
Chapter 8: Conclusion and recommendations
1: Five thinkpieces in collaboration with TRL, MVA, ITP, University of West of England, Universities of Plymouth and Aberdeen.
2: These roles could include door-to-door bookable shared taxis; taxis running on bus routes as a supplement to bus services; the taxi element of train-taxi schemes; taxis that are booked to meet passengers at bus stops; and "conventional" taxi operation where the taxi is booked on an individual basis, with the cost met by the passenger or through a taxicard scheme.