Figure 6-2 - uploaded by Eric Wallischeck
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
TCRP Report 177: Preliminary Strategic Analysis of Next Generation Fare Payment Systems for Public Transportation addresses how next generation transit fare payment (NGFP) systems can be designed to improve the customer experience, streamline transit system operation, and integrate transit more effectively within the broader context of mobility man...
Similar publications
Nowadays users are storing their personal data on a cloud storage because of its numerous advantages. One of the important advantage in cloud storage is sharing of data between users or between organizations. In this paper we propose a simple, flexible, efficient and secure data sharing method for the cloud users. Here we are describing a special t...
Citations
... Changes to fare policy in response to innovations in electronic payment methods and the need for equitable fare structures have been explored in numerous prior studies, with perhaps the most extensive references being those from the Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) (1,(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12). Despite this, there has been a limited discussion of fare capping as an emerging trend in fare policy in previous TCRP reports. ...
Fare capping, a policy in which a transit agency caps the maximum amount a rider pays over a given period, has emerged as a relatively new innovation in public transit fare policy. This research aims to synthesize fare capping policies and to explore the benefits that riders could receive from fare capping. This study applied a multiple case study method to explore fare capping policies at the 101 largest transit agencies in the U.S.A. At least 21 of those 101 agencies were found to have fare capping policies. Of those 21 agencies, 20 used daily fare caps, four used weekly fare caps, and 14 used monthly fare caps. The number of one-way regular fare trips needed to reach the daily, weekly, and/or monthly cap was determined for each agency. Rider discounts for each fare capping period were then calculated. This study also discussed some innovative fare capping policies like “nested” fare capping, which refers to fare caps within fare caps, as well as capping for reduced fare policies. These unique policies could help to address some of the most pressing challenges that face the transit industry in promoting equity for vulnerable groups such as low-income, elderly, and disabled riders, and incentivizing riders to return to transit post-COVID. The findings of this study could inform transit agencies that are planning or considering the implementation of fare capping policies, a trend which has grown rapidly in the transit industry.
... Currently there are four primary types of mobile technology used for ticketing by transit operators: (1) near field communications, (2) short message service, (3) passive ticketing, and (4) flash pass and/or quick response barcode (Wallischeck 2015). The following sections briefly describe each type, following the framework of Wallischeck (2015). ...
... Currently there are four primary types of mobile technology used for ticketing by transit operators: (1) near field communications, (2) short message service, (3) passive ticketing, and (4) flash pass and/or quick response barcode (Wallischeck 2015). The following sections briefly describe each type, following the framework of Wallischeck (2015). ...
... Near field communications (NFC) is a mobile payment technology that employs radio frequency communication to exchange data securely (Wallischeck 2015;Georggi et al. 2017). In this type of fare collection system, passengers can "tap" fare barriers with contactless readers and enter using a smartcard or NFC-enabled smartphone. ...
Many transit agencies in the United States plan to automate their fare collection and limit–or even eliminate–the use of cash fares, with the goals of expediting boarding, collecting data, and lowering costs. Yet about 10% of US adults lack a bank account or credit card, and many rely on restrictive cellphone data plans or do not have access to the internet or a smartphone. These riders will find it difficult to access transit in the future. This paper examines transit users’ experiences with fare technologies using a survey of riders in three cities. Our analysis reveals which riders are most at risk of being excluded, and how mitigation strategies could work to overcome barriers to cash-less transit. We find that a significant number of riders (∼30%) currently use cash on-board buses. If on-board cash fares were to be removed, a significant share of these riders appear able to switch to other options, though many imagine they will continue to use cash in some way (e.g. at retail or ticket vending machines); a small number claim they would no longer be able to ride transit if on-board cash fares were removed. Older and lower-income riders are more at risk of exclusion as they often lack access to smartphones or the internet. A significant number rely on less dependable internet sources, such as public Wi-Fi, potentially inhibiting some from using smartphone and internet-based payment systems. Findings suggest approaches to reduce the number of riders excluded from transit during fare technology adoption.
