Financing public transport services from public funds

Poliak, Miloš; Semanová, Štefánia; Mrníková, Michaela; Komačková, Lenka; Šimurková, Patrícia; Poliaková, Adela; Hernandes, Salvador

dc.title	Financing public transport services from public funds	en
dc.contributor.author	Poliak, Miloš
dc.contributor.author	Semanová, Štefánia
dc.contributor.author	Mrníková, Michaela
dc.contributor.author	Komačková, Lenka
dc.contributor.author	Šimurková, Patrícia
dc.contributor.author	Poliaková, Adela
dc.contributor.author	Hernandes, Salvador
dc.relation.ispartof	Transport Problems
dc.identifier.issn	1896-0596 Scopus Sources, Sherpa/RoMEO, JCR
dc.date.issued	2017
utb.relation.volume	12
utb.relation.issue	4
dc.citation.spage	61
dc.citation.epage	72
dc.type	article
dc.language.iso	en
dc.publisher	Silesian University of Technology, Faculty of Transport
dc.identifier.doi	10.20858/tp.2017.12.4.6
dc.relation.uri	http://yadda.icm.edu.pl/yadda/element/bwmeta1.element.baztech-d18935db-260e-46f1-80f7-4abea8538ad6
dc.subject	transport	en
dc.subject	financing	en
dc.subject	safety	en
dc.subject	factor	en
dc.subject	region	en
dc.subject	public	en
dc.description.abstract	The paper deals with the issue of efficiency of public passenger transport through financial support from public funds from the perspective of improving road safety. The aim is to verify the hypothesis that financing public passenger transport from public funds is a significant tool to influence the number of passengers carried by individual automobile transport, and thus it can be used a tool for influencing road safety in a particular territory. The first part of the paper analyses the sources for financial support of public passenger transport. The next part describes the assumptions for improving road safety through increasing the support of public passenger transport. The last part analyses possible impacts of financing public passenger transport on the road safety in relation to the specified hypothesis.	en
utb.faculty	Faculty of Management and Economics
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10563/1007723
utb.identifier.obdid	43877524
utb.identifier.scopus	2-s2.0-85040370291
utb.identifier.wok	000418919200006
utb.source	j-wok
dc.date.accessioned	2018-02-26T10:20:02Z
dc.date.available	2018-02-26T10:20:02Z
dc.description.sponsorship	Ministry of Education of the Slovak Republic VEGA [1/0143/17 POLIAK]
dc.rights	Attribution 4.0 International
dc.rights.uri	https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.rights.access	openAccess
utb.contributor.internalauthor	Poliaková, Adela
utb.fulltext.affiliation	Miloš POLIAK, Štefánia SEMANOVÁ, Michaela MRNÍKOVÁ, Lenka KOMAČKOVÁ, Patrícia ŠIMURKOVÁ University of Zilina, the Faculty of Operation and Economics of Transport and Communications Univerzitna 1, 010 26 Zilina, Slovak Republic Adela POLIAKOVÁ Tomas Bata University in Zlin, Faculty of Management and Economics Mostni c. 5139 – U2, 760 01 Zlin, Czech Republic Salvador HERNANDES Oregon State University, School of Civil and Construction Engineering 101 Kearney Hall, Corvallis Oregon 97331, USA Corresponding author. E-mail: milos.poliak@fpedas.uniza.sk
utb.fulltext.dates	Received 11.08.2016; accepted in revised form 07.12.2017
utb.fulltext.references	1. Andreoni, J. & Payne, A.A. Do government grants to private charities crowd out giving or fundraising? American Economic Review. 2003. Vol. 93. No. 3. P. 792-812. 2. Asensio, T. & Matas, A. & Raymond, J.L. Redistributive effects of subsidies to urban public transport in Spain. Transport Reviews. 2003. Vol. 23. No. 4. P. 433-452. 3. Beck, A. Barriers to Entry in Rail Passenger Services: Empirical Evidence for Tendering Procedures in Germany. European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research 2011. Vol. 11. No. 1. P. 20-41. 4. Bekkers, R. & Wiepking, P. A literature review of empirical studies of philanthropy: eight mechanisms that drive charitable giving. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly. 2010. Vol. 40. No. 1. P. 924-973. 5. Black, A. Urban Mass Transportation Planning. New York: McGraw-Hill. 1995. ISBN 00-70055- 57-2. 6. Bly, P.H. & Webster, F.V. & Pounds, S. Effects of subsidies on urban public transport. Transportation. 1980. Vol. 9. No. 4. P. 311–331. 7. Borgonovi, F. Do public grants to American theatres crowd-out private donations? Public Choice. 2006. Vol. 126. No. 3-4. P. 429–451. 8. Buckley, R. Pay to play in parks: an Australian policy perspective on visitor fees in public protected areas. Journal of Sustainable Tourism. 2003. Vol. 11. No. 1. P. 56-73. 9. Buehler, R. & Pucher, J. Sustainable transport in Freiburg: lessons from Germany’s environmental capital. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation. 2011. Vol. 5. No. 1. P. 43-70. 10. Buehler, R. & Pucher, J. Making public transport financially sustainable. Transport Policy. 2011. Vol. 18. No. 1. P. 126-138. 11. Cooper, P. & Poe, G.L. & Bateman, I.J. The structure of motivation for contingent values: a case study of lake water quality improvement. Ecological Economics. 2004. Vol. 50. No. 1-2. P. 69-82. 12. Drevs, F. & Tscheulin, D.K. & Lindermeier, J. & Renner, S. Crowding-in or crowding out: An empirical analysis on the effect of subsidies on individual willingness-to-pay for public transportation. Transportation Research Part A. 2014. Vol. 59. No. 1. P. 250-261. 13. Evik, R. & Hoye, A. & Vaa, T. & Sorensen, M. The Handbook of Road Safety Measures. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing. 2009. ISBN 978-1-84855-250-0. 14. Evan, L. Traffic Safety. Bloomfield Hills: Science Serving Society. 2004. ISBN 978-0975-487-10-5. 15. Farrell, S. Financing European transport infrastructure: policies and practice in Western Europe. London: Macmillan. 1999. ISBN 033-37-189-68. 16. Figlus, T. & Liscak, S. & Wilk, A. Condition monitoring of engine timing system by using wavelet packet decomposition of an acoustic signal. Journal of mechanical science and technology. 2014. Vol. 28. No. 5. P. 1663-1671. 17. Geurs, K. & Haaijer, R. & Van Wee, B. Option value of public transport: methodology for measurement and case study for regional rail links in the Netherlands. Transport Reviews. 2006. Vol. 26. No. 5. P. 613-643. 18. Gitelman, V. & Vis, M. & Weijermars, W. & Hakkert, S. Development of Road Safety Performance Indicators for the European Countries. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal. 2014. Vol. 1. No. 4. P. 138-158. 19. Gnap, J. & Konecny, V. & Poliak, M. Elasticity of demand in mass passenger transport. Journal of Economics. 2006. Vol. 54. No. 7. P. 668-684. 20. Hilgers, D. Open government: conceptual insights into a new development in the public sector. Journal of Business Economics. 2012. Vol. 82. No. 1. P. 30. 21. Hilgers, D. & Uhl, C. Citizensourcing – applying the concept of open innovation to the public sector. The International Journal of Public Participation. 2010. Vol. 4. No. 1. P. 67-88. 22. Homburg, C. & Koschate, N. & Hoyer, W.D. Do satisfied customers really pay more? A study of the relationship between customer satisfaction and willingness to pay. Journal of Marketing. 2005. Vol. 69. No. 2. P. 84-96. 23. Horne, C.S. & Johnson, J.L. & Van Slyke, D.M. Do charitable donors know enough - and care enough - about government subsidies to affect private giving to nonprofit organizations? Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly. 2005. Vol. 34. No. 1, P. 136-149. 24. Humphreys, M. & Fowkes, A.S. The significance of indirect use and non-use values in transport appraisal. International Journal of Transport Economics. 2006. Vol. 33. No. 1. P. 17-35. 25. Chang, J.S. Estimation of option and non-use values for intercity passenger rail services. Journal of Transport Geography. 2010. Vol. 18. No. 2. P. 259-265. 26. Chang, J.S. & Cho, S. & Lee, B. & Kim, Y. & Yun, S. A dichotomous choice survey for quantifying option and non-use values of bus services in Korea. Transportation. 2012. Vol. 39. No. 1. P. 33-54. 27. Kalasova, A. & Kapusta, J. & Toman. P. A model of transatlantic intermodal freight transportation between the European continent and the United States. Naše more. 2016. Vol. 63. No. 1. P. 5-15. ISSN 0469-6255. 28. Kim, S.S. & Crompton, J.L. The influence of selected behavioral and economic variables on perceptions of admission price levels. Journal of Travel Research. 2002. Vol. 41. No. 2. P. 144-152. 29. Komackova, L. & Poliak, M. Factors affecting the road safety. In: Transcom 2015. 11th European conference of young researchers and scientists. P. 45-48. 30. Kotchen, M.J. & Reiling, S.D. Environmental attitudes, motivations, and contingent valuation of nonuse values: a case study involving endangered species. Ecological Economics. 2000. Vol. 32. No. 1, P. 93-107. 31. Lai, W.T. & Chen, C.F. Behavioral intentions of public transit passengers - the roles of service quality, perceived value, satisfaction and involvement. Transport Policy. 2011. Vol. 18. No. 2. P. 318-325. 32. Liebe, U. & Preisendorfer, P. & Meyerhoff, J. To pay or not to pay: competing theories to explain individuals’ willingness to pay for public environmental goods. Environment and Behavior. 2011. Vol. 43. No. 1. P. 106-130. 33. Maddison, D. Causality and museum subsidies. Journal of Cultural Economics. 2004. Vol. 28. No. 2, P. 89-108. 34. Molander, S. & Fellesson, m. & Friman, M. & Skalen, P. Market orientation in public transport research a review. Transport Reviews. 2012. Vol. 32. No. 2. P. 155-180. 35. Nyborg, K. & Rege, M. Does public policy crowd out private contributions to public goods. Public Choice. 2003. Vol. 115. No. 3. P. 397-418. 36. Parry, I.W.H. & Small, K. A. Should urban transit subsidies be reduced? American Economic Review. 2009. Vol. 99. No. 3. P. 700-724. 37. Pawlak, Z. Rough sets – Theoretical aspects of reasoning about data. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 1991. ISBN 978-94-010-5564-2. 38. Phanikumar, C. & Maitra, B. Valuing urban bus attributes: an experience in Kolkata. Journal of Public Transport. 2006. Vol. 9. No. 2, P. 69-87. 39. Poliak, M. Relation of reasonable profit and risk in mass passenger transport in Slovakia. Journal of Economics. 2013. Vol. 61. No. 2. P. 206-220. 40. Poliak, M. & Konečný, V. Faktory determinujúce rozsah spoplatnenia cestnej infraštruktúry elektronickým mýtom. Ekonomický časopis. 2008. Vol. 56. No. 7. P. 712-731. [In Slovak: Factors determining the electronic tolling scope of road network. Journal of Economics] 41. Poliakova, A. Taxes and charges in transport and forwarding. Zilina: EDIS-Publishers ZU. 2010. ISBN 978-80-554-0234-5. 42. Predki, B. & Wilk, Sz. Rough set based data exploration using ROSE system. In: Foundations of Intelligent Systems. 1999. 11th International Symposium, ISMIS’99. Warsaw, Poland, June 8-11, 1999. P. 172-180. 43. Proost, S. & Dender, K.V. Optimal urban transport pricing in the presence of congestion, economies of density and costly public funds. Transportation Research A: Policy Practice. 2008. Vol. 42. No. 9. P. 1220-1230. 44. Pucher, J. & Markstedt, A. Consequences of public ownership and subsidies for mass transit: evidence from case studies and regression analysis. Transportation. Vol. 11. No. 4. 1993. P. 323-345. 45. Slowinski, R. Intelligent decision support: Handbook of applications and advances of the rough sets theory. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 1992. ISBN 079-2319-3-0. 46. Small, K.A. & Gomez-Ibanez, J.A. Road pricing for congestion management: the transition from theory to policy. Berkeley: University of California. 1998. Available at: http://www.uctc.net/research/papers/391.pdf. 47. Souche, S & Raux, C. & Croissant, Y. On the perceived justice of urban road pricing: an empirical study in Lyon. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice. 2012. Vol. 46. No. 7. P. 1124-1136. 48. Storchmann, K. H. The impact of fuel taxes on public transport – an empirical assessment for Germany. Transport Policy. 2001. Vol. 8. No. 1, P. 19-28. 49. Tisat, P. Service unreliability and bus subsidy. Transportation Research A: Policy Practice. 1998. Vol. 32. No. 6, P. 423-436. 50. Tscharaktschiew, S. & Hirte, G. Should subsidies to urban passenger transport be increased? A spatial CGE analysis for a German metropolitan area. Transportation Research A: Policy Practice. 2012. Vol. 46. No. 2. P. 285-309. 51. Ubbels, B. & Nijkamp, P. Unconventional funding of urban public transport. Transportation Research Part D. 2002. Vol. 7. No. 1. P. 317-329. 52. Van De Velde, D. A new regulation for the European public transport. Research in Transport Economics. 2008. Vol. 22. No. 1. P. 78-84. 53. Wallis, I. & Bray, D. & Webster, H. To competitively tender or to negotiate – weighing up the choices in a mature market. Research in Transport Economics. 2010. Vol. 29. No. 1. P. 89-98. 54. Yannis, G. & Weijermars, W. & Gitelman, V. & Vis, M. & Chaziris, A. & Papadimitriou, E. & Azevedo, C.L. Road safety performance indicators for the interurban road network. Accident Analysis and Prevention. 2013. Vol. 60. No. 11. P. 384-395.
utb.fulltext.sponsorship	The contribution was elaborated with the support of the Ministry of Education of the Slovak Republic VEGA no. 1/0143/17 POLIAK, M.: Increasing the competitiveness of Slovak carriers providing road transport services in the common market of the European Union.
utb.wos.affiliation	[Poliak, Milos; Semanova, Stefania; Mrnikova, Michaela; Komackova, Lenka; Simurkova, Patricia] Univ Zilina, Fac Operat & Econ Transport & Commun, Univ 1, Zilina 01026, Slovakia; [Poliakova, Adela] Tomas Bata Univ Zlin, Fac Econ & Management, Mostni C 5139-U2, Zlin 76001, Czech Republic; [Hernandes, Salvador] Oregon State Univ, Sch Civil & Construct Engn, 101 Kearney Hall, Corvallis, OR 97331 USA
utb.fulltext.projects	VEGA 1/0143/17