Fares

The Simplicity–Efficiency Trade-Off Every Transit Agency Faces

How important is keeping fares simple in encouraging ridership? This research looked at the impact of simplifying the system in Germany.

Key Takeaways

• The introduction of the Deutschlandticket (DT) in 2023 dramatically simplified the fare system for public transport, providing a nationwide flat-rate ticket for local and regional public transport.
• The theory of cognitive load states that people prefer environments that minimise cognitive effort and information-processing demands.
• The need to analyse fare zones and calculate the break-even point for monthly passes causes significant cognitive friction.
• Transitioning from a car to Public Transport constitutes a high-effort System 2 intervention. By removing the ‘tariff-calculation’ phase, the DT facilitates the formation of new habits.
• For the majority of users, simplicity is not merely a convenience factor but a key driver—a “simplicity bonus”—that appears to play a central role alongside price.
• The ticket increases cognitive simplicity by eliminating the mental burden of fare selection and zone calculation, thereby minimising unnecessary cognitive load.
• The ticket optimises the procedural dimension (procedural simplicity) by reducing “transaction effort” through the subscription model.
• The DT offers outcome simplicity: the user gains the certainty that their mobility decision remains valid and “fair” regardless of regional fare boundaries.
• While existing riders were primarily motivated by financial relief, new riders were more strongly attracted by the radical reduction in cognitive load.
• The results suggest that in complex service environments, cognitive accessibility is just as crucial as financial accessibility.

Comment

Whilst a simplified ticket brings the significant benefits explored in the paper, this comes at significant trade-offs.

Firstly, it prevents demand management on the network to reduce congestion at peak times and encourage more use in off-peak times through higher fares at peak times and lower fares in off-peak times or on poorly utilised routes, to encourage ridership.

Secondly, this lack of differential pricing comes at a significant financial cost, which translates into either higher subsidies or a lack of funds for maintenance and/or improving services.

These trade-offs suggest that a balance needs to be reached between simplicity and variable fares.

What Next?

Does your fare strategy take into account demand management, financial optimisation, and cognitive complexity?

Strategic Planning

431 mobility plans, but not enough to move people out of cars

How well are the EU, its member states, and local authorities supporting sustainable commuting in urban areas? This report from the European Court of Auditors undertook a review.

Key Takeaways

• To increase sustainable mobility, the European Commission promoted the concept of sustainable urban mobility plans (SUMPs): strategic mobility plans aimed at improving, in a sustainable way, accessibility to and mobility within a functional urban area for people, businesses and goods.
• The report assessed whether:
  • The Commission’s legislative, policy and support actions were appropriate in providing effective commuting transport;
  • The design, implementation and monitoring of the SUMPs by relevant authorities in the sampled six member states (Czechia, Spain, France, Hungary, Poland, Portugal) were fit for purpose; and
  • The selection, implementation and results of 21 sampled EU-funded projects were effective in addressing sustainable commuter mobility.
• The report concludes that the EU's legal framework on urban mobility has been enhanced by the Commission’s sustained efforts. Notably, it now requires sustainable urban mobility plans to be prepared for 431 urban areas.
• There are various shortcomings that undermine plans' effectiveness, particularly in relation to their coverage of commuter flows and the level of ambition in changing travel habits away from car use.
• SUMPs often did not include measures to discourage the use of private cars.
• While most SUMPs included parking management measures (e.g. parking restrictions in certain areas), only half of them included measures on other aspects, such as land-use and spatial planning and mobility management by employers for their staff
• Recommendation 1 - Enhance the support provided to member state authorities. The Commission should:
  • Complement its current SUMP guidance, in particular, how to best apply the concept of functional urban areas and shared mobility in suburban areas, as well as how to best integrate land-use and spatial planning with mobility planning;
  • Set up a single information point to guide member state authorities on the opportunities provided by the various support initiatives available (such as funding or capacity-building).
• Recommendation 2 - Monitor modal share
  • The Commission should work with member states to define an indicator on modal share.
• Recommendation 3 - Promote proper geographical area coverage by SUMPs
  • The Commission should monitor whether the SUMPs submitted to it cover the functional urban areas of the cities concerned.
• Recommendation 4 - Provide a robust methodology for measuring changes to greenhouse gas emissions

Comment

This is a useful audit and provides further evidence of some of the flaws identified in other research: a lack of action on mode shift and the need for better integration between transport and land use.

What Next?

Do your mobility plans integrate with land use, and are they doing enough to get people out of cars?

Road User Charges

Road Pricing as the City's Operating System

What role should road pricing play in how cities function? This research article argues that in the future, road pricing should function as the city’s “operating system”.

Key Takeaways

• Road pricing is examined not as a single-policy solution, but as a potential coordinating mechanism within a complex and interdependent system of urban challenges, including climate, energy, technology, public finance, and social equity.

Proposes four thematic clusters:

• Conceptual reframings of road pricing - reframes road pricing, moving beyond narrow interpretations centred on congestion or user charges.
• Justice, governance, and political economy - addresses the social and political conditions under which road pricing is contested, legitimised, and sustained.
• Implementation and system effects - focuses on how road pricing operates within urban systems, particularly sustainability, land use, resilience, and alternative policy pathways.
• Technological disruptions and future risks - addresses the future-oriented role of road pricing under rapid technological change.
• Emerging mobility technologies, digitalisation, and fiscal transition generate new externalities and require corresponding innovations.
• Innovation in road pricing as a control mechanism over car bloat, unsafe driving, and the externalities of eCAVs.
• The integration of technological disruptions requires road pricing to evolve into a dynamic governance model.
• Road pricing must evolve towards a weight-distance charging model with dynamic penalties for unproductive journeys.
• Pricing must be reconfigured to internalise the cost of public space occupancy and penalise the uncontrolled increase in vehicle kilometres travelled (VKT).
• Traditional management through regulated parking is now obsolete, given last-mile logistics and autonomous delivery robots.
• A proposed innovation is dynamic kerb pricing, where loading and unloading spaces are managed as “temporary access windows” with prices varying by demand and vehicle type.
• Road pricing must evolve towards Distance-Based Pricing (DBP) with dynamic multipliers based on vehicle occupancy.
• The convergence of artificial intelligence and telematics allows a shift from reactive pricing to predictive governance, enabling advanced price adjustments to discourage traffic.
• By integrating telematics and predictive algorithms, road pricing becomes the “operating system” that allows authorities to respond in real time.

Comment

There are many important ideas in this paper about the potential role of road pricing in improving cities, not just now but in the future with the advent of autonomous vehicles.

I have written previously about my support for road pricing to help manage autonomous vehicles. However, the road pricing debate is stuck politically.

I predict that a handful of places will successfully implement comprehensive road pricing, creating a significant competitive advantage for those that do, as they will work far more effectively than those without it.

What Next?

Do you have a strategy for progressing road pricing?

Quick Adventures in Transport Wonderland

Here is what else I came across this week:

• ​Halving the fuel tax was a bad idea – and it shouldn’t be extended. There’s a fairer alternative - A Conversation article making the case for a road user charge in Australia.
• ​Trade Associations and Lobbying for Roads: Funding, Strategies, and Discourses - A working paper examining the road lobbying industrial complex.
• ​CoMoUK Annual Car Club Report UK - How carsharing is doing in the UK.