• Proceedings of the KSR Conference
• /
• 2003.10b
• /
• pp.46-51
• /
• 2003

The government's financial subsidy system for the construction project of urban rail transit needs to be revised. In 1998, the central government raised its subsidy rate to 50$\%$ of the total cost of construction. The 'method for differentiating subsidies depending on construction type and transit System' is suggested here, so that a subsidy rate can be raised for the construction of Light Rail Transit, which costs less to construct. Such methods will force local governments to make decisions regarding construction method and project size in a more rational manner.

• Journal of Korean Society of Transportation
• /
• v.24 no.1 s.87
• /
• pp.59-72
• /
• 2006

In spite of continuous implementation of the transportation demand management (TDM), the profuse use of car at the peak-time has caused chronic traffic congestion in the Seoul downtown area. This study makes a comparative analysis on the effectiveness of commuting cost subsidy system for public transit user with other policy instruments such as an increment in fuel tax and park cost. This study not only follows standard guidelines of stated preference methodology to guarantee objectivity, but also uses sample enumeration method and non-Parametric bootstrapping method to secure reliability of empirical results. As a result of empirical studies, the conversion effect of car to public transit is superior to other two Policy instruments. Also. an increment in fuel tax and park cost is income-regressive from the equity aspect in a wage bracket, but commuting cost subsidy system for Public transit user is Income-progressive As a fundamental research on commuting cost subsidy system for public transit user, this study is likely to Provide Policy-makers with quantitative information useful in establishing Public transport Policy to Promote the use of the public transit.

• Proceedings of the KSR Conference
• /
• 2009.05a
• /
• pp.1799-1804
• /
• 2009

Bimodal Tram is spotlighted for alternative public transportation system which have punctualness, efficiency, and convenience running between capacity of bus and light rail transit. It have the advantage of automatic operation system when it runs at exclusive right-of-way as like as railway, runs as same as a bus at road concurrently. However, concrete construction plan is not established since the law as well as government subsidy are not defined. For activating bimodal tram construction, this paper analyzed as below. 1) understanding obstacles of activating construction through current status of local governments' bimodal tram promotion plan, 2) finding essential elements for legislation through transportation mode characteristics comparison and system rules analysis, 3) related foreign law analysis.

• Journal of Korean Society of Transportation
• /
• v.31 no.3
• /
• pp.74-85
• /
• 2013

We analyze the efficiency of congestion pricings and transit subsidies in the spatial micro-economic model based on a general equilibrium environment. In this setting, we decompose the total welfare change into component factors and identify the reason of the change in the efficiency caused by policy instruments; these component factors are divided into indirect factors and direct factors including of origin-destination and mode choices. We set up the model as adding mode choice to the standard format in the fashion of Anas and Kim (1996) and extend the methodology proposed by Yu and Rhee (2011) and Rhee (2012) for deriving theoretical and analytical solution. Most of welfare gain comes from the modal shift from car to bus. The relative efficiency of subsidies in relation to the first-best pricing is lower than it of congestion pricings although the change in bus share by subsidies is similar to it by congestion pricing. Subsidies give rise to more modal shift from a car to a bus for long-distance commuting than it caused by congestion pricings. As the increase of bus share for long-distance commuting leads to the increase of cross-commuters passing through CBD, the welfare gain by subsidies is lower than it by congestion pricings.