Examination of Process of Innovation at Transit Systems

A study of the innovation process in transit agencies had two major components. First, case studies of innovations adopted by transit agencies in Wisconsin were conducted. Second, transit agencies across the country were surveyed online to gain a sense of innovation and change. An analysis of the case studies showed that many had common themes and barriers to the various innovations studied. These barriers and themes were funding, the nature of the organization, persistence, the regional planning commission, user involvement, a problem-centered approach, and a champion. The innovations discussed in the case studies came about because there was a need to improve the transit systems, an internal champion, funding, and persistence to overcome barriers to change. Analysis of the survey results revealed that the primary institutional barrier to innovation or change was money, and the main reason for change was an internal leader or champion. Innovation is most likely to occur when there is a need to improve service, when there is a champion to lead and coordinate to bring about the change, and when there is a source of funds for the planning and implementation of the innovation

ACCESSIBILITY, CONNECTIVITY, AND CAPTIVITY: IMPACTS ON TRANSIT CHOICE

Travelers can be classified into two groups: choice users and captive users. Choice users select transit or automobile service when they view one option as superior, whereas captive users have only one travel option. Surprisingly, little is known about captivity effects on mode split models. This research examines the way transit service factors such as accessibility and connectivity relate to mode captivity and mode choice. Data for this investigation come from the Portland, Oregon, 1994 Household Activity and Travel Diary Survey, the Regional Land Information System for the Portland area, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency fuel economy database, and the U.S. Department of Energy. Individual trip data were segmented into transit captive, automobile captive, and choice users based on information about private vehicle availability, transit connectivity, and distance from a transit stop. Traditional transit mode split models are compared with models that segment users into choice and captive groups. It was found that traditional models underestimate the variation in mode choice for captive users, while overestimating the attractiveness of transit for choice users. These results indicate that better transit forecasts can result if accessibility and connectivity are used to help identify captive users. Additionally, among choice transit users, differences in travel times between automobile and transit modes do little to influence mode selection, while walk access to transit has more effect than previously thought