This opinion article was written by Daniel Ĺ traub. For more like this, see our smart cities newsfeed.
If the bus was free, would you take it more often? That’s the question at the heart of the discussion around fare free public transport.
This article is putting a spotlight on the success story of free-fare public transport policy (FFPT) in FrĂ˝dek-MĂstek, Czechia. A town of 56,000 people, which is located in rapidly developing international industrial area.
FrĂ˝dek-MĂstek deserves a closer look in part due to its position as a pioneer in this field, and in part because the available datasets makes it an ideal candidate for further investigation. Since I've been focusing on city and the concept of FFPT over the past few years, first in my bachelor and since in my master thesis, I know the whole picture of the fare-free scheme implementation well.
A brief description the conclusions from both my masters and bachelors can be found in recently published article I wrote with my colleague. Before we dive into why FrĂ˝dek-MĂstek’s story has been a successful one, it is important to understand why the city’s leaders abolished fares in public transport at the first place.
Empty seats in the bus
The city administrators in FrĂ˝dek-MĂstek have two reasons for making public transport fare-free.
Firstly, there is a poor transportation system in FrĂ˝dek-MĂstek, which cannot meet transportation demands. This is due to the absence of a much-needed highway bypass which would divert main transport flows from the city centre. Because of the lack of this infrastructure, the city centre is often bogged down by heavy traffic. This is the consequence not only of a general increase in car use, which is a characteristic trend of transport development in Czechia over the last three decades, but also due to newly opened industrial parks in the hinterland of the city. This has resulted in increased traffic flows by cause of daily commuting and freight transport.
when it’s easier to travel with public transport (for example due to congestion in the city centre) or walk, people will do so
Secondly, there has been a decrease in the number of users of the local public transport, since the turn of the century.
Implementing the free fare public transport policy was, around 2010, seen as a way to improve both the efficiency of public transport and reduce the number of cars on the road.
As a bonus, it was also perceived as step to provide something extra for the residents of the city, as a compensation for the much-needed highway bypass and the negative externalities caused by excessive traffic intensity (e.g. congestions, higher risk of accidents, air and noise pollution).
What does it cost?
Opponents of free fare transport policy frequently point to its high financial costs which, in their view, outweighs its impact.
Despite these arguments, the analysis of public transport conducted before the fare-free implementation, predicted different scenarios, in which the city would be still increasing its subsidies on the public transport. The city planners from FrĂ˝dek-MĂstek were then able to see the bigger picture and, in 2010, faced with already decreasing tickets revenue (due to declining patronage), they realised that higher financial costs, which tend to increase each year, should not be an argument against implementing the policy.
Moreover, other neighbouring municipalities around FrĂ˝dek-MĂstek wanted to join the fare-free zone, which resulted in additional funding of public transport service not only from new municipalities, but also from the higher authority MoravskoslezskĂ˝ kraj, one of the 14 administrative regions of the Czech Republic. Also, the city decided to keep existing paid tariffs (single-journey ticket, pre-paid monthly ticket) and add fare-free tariff only for the residents of fare-free zone.
Thanks to additional funding and the fact that not all residents received a fare-free card at the same time, the financial costs were increasing steadily. This slowed down the immediate financial burden of FFPT on the city budget.
Switching lanes
The project was launched in March 2011 and just in the first year ridership increased by 16% compared to 2010. Such a steady increase continued till 2017, when the first decline in ridership occurred.
The city has fulfilled its first objective, to increase the efficiency of public transport. Regarding the second objective, reducing car use, we could confirm that the policy motivates drivers to use public transport, but actually getting drivers out of their cars is more difficult. The extent of such a shift is rather modest as the city is still missing crucial transport infrastructure, and it is, according to the city leaders, impossible to notice any reduction in the number of cars on the road.
if the system is well designed, it does not lead to dramatic financial burden
Although the traffic intensity has not been affected by the FFPT, its implementation caused a significant change in travel behaviour of residents. Aside from the substitution effect of the policy on non-motorized means of transport (walking, cycling), it has changed to some extent habits of habitual drivers.
Our research shows that people who could benefit from FFPT, are more open to other means of transport and their decision is affected by the purpose of their journey. That means, when it’s easier to travel with public transport (for example due to congestion in the city centre) or walk, people will do so. The policy of FFPT is thus significantly changing ongoing modal share in given transport system by making it more variable and user friendly.
The way forward
So what can we learn from FrĂ˝dek-MĂstek? As the case shows, if the system is well designed, it does not lead to dramatic financial burden. It is true that the FFPT scheme is more expensive than user paid public transport, but thanks to its limitation and additional funding, the cost for the city government is acceptable.
The fact that public transport is free only for residents, could be an advantage for towns in the suburbs of regional centres and cities, as there is a higher demand on transportation and limited financial resources. Taking such a step could increase finances in the city budget and provide more sources for transportation development.
With abolishing fares, the city has succeeded not only to increase ridership in the public transport, but first and foremost, to change ongoing travel behaviour resulting in higher mode split, than before adopting the principles of FFPT.
This new dynamic in travel behaviour is a huge asset for the city planning authorities, which should now focus not only on the quality of public transport, but mainly on making enough and equal space for each mean of transport, to make the most out of this trend. FFPT represents only one out of many tools of urban development and its application should be supported by other measures (e.g. pedestrian and car-free zones). Transportation development is a complex challenge and only systematic approach should prevail_. —_ Daniel Štraub
Can’t get enough of fare-free public transport? Click here to read how Belgium, the Netherlands and other European countries are jumping on the bandwagon.
(Picture credit: Unsplash)
Log in or sign up to continue the conversation