 
|
First principles assessment
Expected Demand impacts
The table below sets out the expected demand impacts in response to the
implementation of effective bus priority measures.
| Response |
Reduction in road traffic
|
Expected in situations |
 |
 |
Improved bus reliability and speed may
allow later departure time for PT users. If there is mode switch to
bus this will also affect departure time. Possible increase in car
journey times may necessitate earlier departure for those that continue
to drive, an impact that is likely to diminish with time as travel
behaviour adapts. |
 |
 |
Car-drivers may reroute in response
to reduced capacity on treated road. In the longer term bus operators
may reroute services along treated roads. |
 |
 |
Possibility that bus priority may make
bus users more likely to travel to certain destinations. |
 |
|
Number of trips by bus may increase
but possibly less car trips due to reduced road capacity for private
cars. Net effect on number of trips is not certain. |
 |
 |
Likely mode switch from car
to bus. If cyclists are able to use bus lanes etc then possible switch
to cycles also. Some cyclists and walkers may switch to be improved
bus service. |
 |
|
Unlikely to discourage car ownership |
 |
|
A factor that may influence
this decision if measures are sufficiently comprehensive. |
 |
=
Weakest possible response, |
 |
=
strongest possible positive response |
 |
= Weakest
possible negative response, |
 |
= strongest
possible negative response |
 |
= No response
|
Short and long run demand responses
The table below shows the expected demand responses over a longer period
of time.
| Expected Short and long run demand responses |
|
=
Weakest possible response, |
|
=
strongest possible positive response |
|
= Weakest
possible negative response, |
|
= strongest
possible negative response |
|
= No response
|
Supply impacts
Bus priority measures should increase the speed and reliability of bus
services. For a given cost this will allow operators to increase frequency
on existing routes or expand network coverage. Furthermore, the improved
quality of service is likely to attract more passengers and the increased
revenue can potentially be used to fund further service improvements.
Whether or not the bus operator chooses to use the extra revenue to increase
service levels may well depend upon the legislative and market structure
in which it operates.
Financing requirements
The financing requirement for bus priority measures varies enormously
according to the measure proposed and the situation in which it is to
be implemented. One thing that is clear however is that bus priority can
provide high-quality rapid transit at a fraction of the cost of any rail
transit alternative.
Expected impact on key policy objectives
| Objective |
Scale of contribution |
Comment |
| 
|
|
In congested conditions bus priority measures are likely to
significantly improve the efficiency of public transport and so
benefit all existing PT users.
If the bus priority measures significantly increase congestion,
the picture is slightly more complex. Car users that continue to
drive may well be disadvantaged. Some car users that transfer to
the newly improved bus service will be beneficiaries whilst others
will be worse off than before bus priority was implemented.
|
| 
|
|
By encouraging mode switch from car to public transport and
possibly suppressing some car trips amenity will be improved. Some
bus priority measures such as bus lanes tend to reduce the speed
of private vehicles and also move them further away from pedestrians
on the pavement and cyclists in the bus lane (if allowed). However,
diversion of traffic to residential streets can cause problems. |
| 
|
|
Reduced road traffic will reduce emissions of local pollutants
and greenhouse gases. |
| 
|
|
Appropriately designed bus priority measures will improve bus
reliability and journey times which will improve accessibility for
the less well off and socially excluded. |
|
 |
|
Bus priority measures may reduce traffic levels and speeds
which is likely to reduce accidents. |
| 
|
|
Impact on economic growth will depend on individual circumstances
if there are overall efficiency benefits than bus priority measures
may contribute to economic growth. |
| 
|
|
Implementation of bus priority measures is usually reletaviely
inexpensive. There are likely to be operating cost reductions and
increased revenues for bus operators which may reduce subsidy requirements. |
| = Weakest
possible positive contribution, | | = strongest
possible positive contribution |
| = Weakest
possible negative contribution | | = strongest
possible negative contribution |
| =
No contribution |
Winners and losers
The table below sets out the impacts of bus priority measures on various
groups in society.
| Group |
Short-term |
Comment |
| Large scale freight and commercial traffic |
|
Possible short-term disbenefits if congestion increased. |
| Small businesses |
|
Possible short-term disbenefits if congestion increased although
journey to work may be improved for PT users. Also some problems
of frontage access. |
| High income car-users |
|
Possible short-term disbenefits if congestion increased. |
| People with a low income |
|
Low income users are more likely to travel by bus.
More likely to be bus users however and would therefore benefit
in both the short-term and long-term.
|
| People with poor access to public transport |
|
Bus priority may improve the viability of certain bus services
which may improve network coverage so benefiting this group. |
| All existing public transport users |
|
Existing public transport users will benefit from improved
reliability and journey times. |
| People living adjacent to the area targeted |
/ |
Possible short-term disbenefits if congestion increased and
traffic diverted. |
| People making high value, important journeys |
/ |
If using a car then possible short-term disbenefits if congestion
increased. If using bus this group would benefit.
|
| The average car user |
|
Possible short-term disbenefits if congestion increased. |
|
=
weakest possible benefit, |
|
=
strongest benefit |
|
= weakest
possible disbenefet, |
|
= strongest
possible disbenefit |
|
= neither
wins nor loses |
Barriers to implementation
| Barrier |
Scale |
Comment |
| Legal |
|
In a regulated environment such as exists in most developed countries
priority measures can be implemented by the transit authority which
can then operate either directly or indirectly through franchise arrangements
a specified level and quality of service. In the UK outside London
where the bus industry is deregulated there is no guarantee that after
the local authority has implemented the bus brought in measures private
operators will operate appropriate levels and quality of service.
Quality partnerships have been introduced in an attempt to resolve
this problem but they have two major weaknesses: they are not legally
binding; and they do not guarantee exclusive operating rights and
so the operator may not feel sufficiently incentivised to invest in
appropriate levels of new vehicles. |
| Finance |
|
Cost will very much depend on the type and scale of scheme
implemented, in some instances it may be little more than changed
road markings whereas a dedicated busway for example is a major
piece of infrastructure that can cost several million pounds. |
| Political |
|
Motorists are most likely to notice disruption during the implementation
of the scheme and then in the short-term at least possible worsening
of congestionResidents and frontage businesses are also likely to
oppose bus priority schemes.
Political risks are also affected by the legislative framework because
if the authority cannot guarantee an appropriate level and quality
of service after the implementation of the measures then the political
risks are greatly exacerbated because motorists will not see any
benefit to justify the disruption that the measures have caused.
|
| Feasibility |
|
Technically there are unlikely to be major barriers. |
|
=
minimal barrier, |
|
=
most significant barrier |
Text edited at the Institute for Transport Studies,
University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT
|
