Technology-Based Transit Improvements

How Will This Help | Target Market | Implementation Examples | References

Introduction

Target Market

All modes of transit benefit from technological evolution. To decrease congestion, services that operate in peak times and have consistently high ridership are the best candidates for technological improvements.

How Will This Help?

• Improves loading times. Technologies that reduce the time it takes to pay fares make boarding more efficient. Speedier boarding reduces the wait time at pick-up and allows a transit vehicle to rejoin surrounding traffic sooner (assuming standard buses), lessening the impact on congestion related to the stopped transit vehicle.
• Increases rider confidence that they will get to their destination in an expected time frame, ultimately increasing the likelihood of transit use.
• Reduces costs and environmental impacts by using alternative fuels in transit vehicles.
• Reduces cars on congested roads. On-demand information, streamlined fare technology, and services that are more responsive to customer needs increase transit ridership, reducing the number of single-occupancy vehicles on many congested corridors.

Implementation Examples

There are many examples of successful technological improvements in transit. Improved fare payment and enhanced real-time information increase ridership and pressure on congested corridors.

Hong Kong
In 1998, eight transit operators collaborated to offer a regional smart card. The smart card, called Octopus, is accepted on buses, rail vehicles, and ferries and is used by 95 percent of Hong Kong’s population—amounting to over 10 million uses per day in 2010. The stored value on Octopus can also be used to make purchases other than transit fares. Grocery stores, convenience stores, restaurants, parking meters, and parking lots also accept the card. A similar system, called Ventra and operated by MasterCard, has recently been implemented in the Chicago area.

United States
NextBus, a company that manages transit location data for over 80 transit operators in the United States, presents real-time transit information to passengers (such as routing changes, vehicle location, and estimated time of arrival). NextBus also provides information to the transit operators (such as adherence to schedule, performance of the drivers, headway times, and information about vehicles that have left their intended route). By synthesizing data about transit vehicles for multiple audiences, NextBus enables an improved customer experience and improved behind-the-scenes transit performance.

Application Techniques and Principles

Implementing new technology for transit is complicated and requires input from various stakeholders, industry experts, and the general public.

Research
Research questions to answer include:

• How does the currently implemented technology perform?
• What improvements are necessary, and what can be left alone?
• What private-sector technology can supplement what is already provided or needed?
• What are the costs versus the benefits associated with a new technology?
• How would the agency implement the technology in question?

Planning
Implementation plans should include:

• The details of the technology sought.
• The ways it may improve service.
• The method of integrating it with the rest of the agency’s service provision.
• A timeline of key milestones associated with the adoption of the chosen technology.

Public Outreach
Technological improvements in transit affect the public in many ways. New fare technology may require an initial fee from riders (such as to purchase smart cards). Changes to the way information about transit options is disseminated (for example, a transition from static paper route pamphlets to digital and interactive route apps for smartphones) will require public outreach and a transition period for riders. Notifying riders quickly of technological improvements helps transit agencies effectively communicate the reasons updates are needed and educate the public about the new system(s).

Implementation
Once the outreach phase is completed, an agency may begin rolling out the technology improvements. Typically, such efforts take place in phases to control for implementation issues and ensure that the majority of riders are not affected while the challenges of new system implementation are worked out.

Another way of transitioning to new technology is to offer it as an option next to the technology it is replacing (for example, a smart card fare reader next to the standard cash receptacle) and to pair it with an ongoing outreach campaign urging riders to learn more about the new technology before it becomes their only option.

Issues

Transit technological improvements are complicated and costly, and usually require public education, outreach, and decision-maker approval.

Cost
While technology is becoming more affordable, large-scale implementation of complex systems is expensive. Cost is the biggest challenge of technology-based transit improvements. For example, a single new fare box (at least one per vehicle) that is capable of reading a smart card may cost between $10,000 and $15,000.

Public Perception/Acceptance
Riders and other public stakeholders have varied opinions and, without proper education and outreach, can be resistant to change.

For example, without learning that a new smart card system can decrease boarding time, many riders may resist the change because of the cost of purchasing a smart card. However, once they understand, many riders consider the improvement worth the cost.

Speed
Technology changes faster than the transit industry. City buses are expected to operate for 12 years (according to Federal Transit Agency funding guidance). In an industry that is accustomed to having multi-year planning time frames, agencies will likely struggle to fund and execute plans and projects with the speed necessary to stay technologically relevant.

Project Champion
In publicly funded agencies, decision makers wield significant power over outcomes. As the transit industry embraces technology, a project champion may be valuable in garnering financial and public support for implementing a new system.

Who Is Responsible?

Transit agencies or private entities are ultimately responsible for the implementation of updated technology. However, multiple agencies can collaborate on systems, such as regional fare payment technologies.

Project Time Frame

Accounting for the time required for research, planning, procurement, and implementation, any technological transit improvement will take at least one year. However, most require a multi-year roll out.

Cost

The cost of technological transit improvements is difficult to determine. There are numerous variables that affect cost, such as:

• Scale—1 route or 100?
• Desired customization—off-the-shelf technology or something developed specifically for the agency?
• Type of technology—fare payment systems or route planning software?

Beyond these issues, many technological transit improvements are proprietary, which limits available information on cost.

Note that in some circumstances, implementing these strategies may result in a net positive outcome by saving transit agencies money in the long-term.

Data Needs

The most likely assessment of technological improvements is a cost-benefit analysis. Along with the cost of the technology, data regarding the potential outcomes of a given improvement will always be necessary. These outcomes can include:

• More service predictability for riders.
• Decreased fuels costs.
• Improved vehicle longevity.
• Increased ridership.
• Increased service speed.
• Lower staff costs.

Technology-Based Transit Improvement Best Practices

• Type of location: Urbanized areas.
• Agency practices: Innovation and forward thinking.
• Frequency of reanalysis: Every six months to analyze the impact of technological improvements so that more recent innovations can be adopted if necessary.
• Supporting policies or actions needed: Enact policies requiring improved efficiency and customer experiences. Diversify funding to improve the likelihood that such innovations will be implemented. Include technology updates as an element in the strategic planning process.
• Complementary strategies: Fare strategies, all transit modes, real-time ridesharing, pay-to-drive off-peak, state employee trip reduction, managed lanes (high-occupancy toll), transportation management associations, and trip reduction ordinances.

For More Information

Alternative Energy News. “Public Transportation.” Alternative Energy News Magazine, 2014.

City of Calgary. Investing in Mobility: 2015–2024 Transportation Infrastructure Investment Plan. 2014.

Dowling, Stephen. “Radically Re-thinking the Bus System.” BBC Future, 2013.

Jandt, Fred. “Top Tech Innovations.” Mass Transit Magazine, March 2014.

Moscoe, G., D. Kantor, and C. Henke. “10 Technologies That Will Shape the Future of Public Transportation.” METRO Magazine, 2006.

Schlosser, Nicole. “Open Fare Payment System Convenient for Riders, Transit Systems.” Metro Magazine, February 2011.

Yates, Dana. How Smart Technology Could Change Public Transit. June 17, 2013. http://phys.org/news/2013-06-smart-technology-transit.html.