Regulation of the informal transport sector in Rio de Janeiro,Brazil: welfare impacts and policy analysis

In Brazil, the explosion of informal transport activity during the past decade has had profound effects on formal public transport systems and is a source of great controversy in the urban transportation sector. A variety of policies have been proposed to manage the growth of the sector. This study seeks to understand how proposed policies will impact the users of these systems. A corridor in Rio de Janeiro with substantial informal activity was used as a case study. Measures of welfare changes in a discrete choice framework were used to estimate proposed policies’ impacts on users. Eleven candidate policies were evaluated, ranging from the eradication of the informal modes and investment in formal modes, to the legalization of the informal modes. Benefits were compared with costs and the distribution of benefits across income classes was explored. Net benefits from some policies were found to be substantial. Legalizing the informal sector was found to benefit users slightly but further investments in the sector are probably inefficient. Users benefited most from improvements in formal mass transit modes, at roughly 100–200 dollars per commuter per year. Finally, policies to foster a competitive environment for the delivery of both informal and formal services were shown to benefit users about 100 dollars per commuter per year. Together, the regulation of the informal sector and investments in the formal sector serve to reinforce the movement towards competitive concessions for services and help reduce the impacts of cartelization and costly in-road competition.

Hedonic modeling of commercial property values: distance decay from the links and nodes of rail and highway infrastructure

Transportation - This study investigates the impacts of positive and negative externalities of highways and light rail on commercial property values in Phoenix, Arizona. We hypothesize that the...     

A justice-theoretic approach to the distribution of transportation benefits: Implications for transportation planning practice in the United States

Transportation improvements inevitably lead to an uneven distribution of user benefits, in space and by network type (private and public transport). This paper makes a moral argument for what would be a fair distribution of these benefits. The argument follows Walzer’s “Spheres of Justice” approach to define the benefits of transportation, access, as a sphere deserving a separate, non-market driven, distribution. That distribution, we propose, is one where the maximum gap between the lowest and highest accessibility, both by mode and in space, should be limited, while attempting to maximize average access. We then review transportation planning practice for a priori distributional goals and find little explicit guidance in conventional and even justice-oriented transportation planning and analyses. We end with a discussion of the implications for practice.