<Tutor>
<Department>
Introduction
The question of whether the government or the private transport provides better public transport is still and ongoing debate. This question will be addressed in this discussion in which the factors indicating which of the two transport systems is better than the other will be determined. Although the private sector appears to offer the best possible transport service to the public, but in reality the government transport system is still the most efficient on every level. Examining the existing literatures encompassing the pros and cons of the private and government transport service will substantiate the stated argument on the given issue.
Description
Examining which of the two public transport providers is better than the other, it is important to put emphasis on the underlying issues concerning the public transportation system. First, public transportation is defined by the characteristic in which the mode of transport service is being shared passengers or is available to use the general public (Daganzo, 2010). Furthermore, the transport industry is divided into two sectors, the public and the private where the public sector is owned and operated by the government while various private companies own the private sector. However, the two sectors are immersed in a longstanding battle for transport supremacy.
Several literatures suggest both the good and the bad about the government and private transport sector. From a closer look at the issues and factors affecting the quality of transport service provided to the riding public, it is apparent that the government transport is a better provider than the private sector. The characteristics of the government operated transport services that the private sector cannot match include efficiency, cost-effectiveness, sustainable, and stimulates economic growth. Profitability is not always the main objective that drives the sustainability of the government transport system, but the growth of the local economy indicated by the mass of commuters using the public transport (Buxbaum and Ortiz, 2007).
Analysis
The main question to address here is why the government transport service is better than the private sector. First, the government owned and operated transport service is efficient by all means. To elaborate, the volume of commuters that the two biggest government transport services namely the bus and railway system accommodate reduces the amount of private vehicles on the road (Holmgren, 2013). The number of individuals wanting to move at the same times on a daily basis overwhelms the availability of vehicles that the private sector can provide. For example, the 2009 US Commuting Census shows that an average of 119, 393 commuters go to work everyday at peak hours of 7:00AM, at the same time, the average availability of private transport for public commuters during the same hour is only 157 (McKenzie and Rapino, 2011).
This means that 760 workers will share a single taxicab at the same time, whereas the government transport such as the railway system can accommodate 1,000 passengers every 90 seconds (Demery and Higgins, 2003). Given the difference in passenger accommodation, the government transit system is far more efficient than the private sector in accommodating passengers at any given time. Another important advantage that the government transport service over the private sector is cost-effectiveness. The operational cost of government owned transit systems is subsidized by the government, which in return reduces the ticket cost that the commuting public will have to pay for the ride. In comparison to the private sector, the average fare for a bus or subway ride in New York for example is $2.75 as opposed to $7.53 taxi fare for a 3-kilometer ride. The difference on the cost between the private and government transport benefit the commuters in general, and not to mention that the government transport provides more secured travel.
Sustainability is another factor that makes the government transport a better service provider than the private sector. The overall carbon footprint set by the transportation sector in 2013 is 27% in which the larger portion of the emission was contributed by private vehicles (Solomon et al., 2009). In this sense, the reduction in the volume of private vehicles translates to a significant reduction of carbon emission. The only solution to carbon emission is to use the government transit services. Consequently, too much carbon in the atmosphere particularly in urban areas is considered a health risk for everyday commuters. Hence, the reduction in carbon emission constitutes a long-term health benefit for the general public (Banister et al., 2007).
Conclusion
Government owned and operated transport services catering to public commuters is better than the private sector in terms of sustainability, cost-effectiveness, and efficiency. The transport service provided by the private sector is more costly than the public transport because the operational cost reflects on the fare rate charged towards the commuters. At the same time, the government transport accommodates larger volume of commuters, which the private sector cannot possibly match. Lastly, the government transport system is a sustainable and long-term solution to the growing problem in air pollution, which constitutes several health risks on the part of the commuters.
References
Banister, D., Newson, C., & Ledbury, M. (2007). The cost of transport on the environment: The role of teleworking in reducing carbon emissions. Oxford: University of Oxford. Retrieved from http://www.tsu.ox.ac.uk/pubs/1024-banister-etal.pdf
Buxbaum, J., & Ortiz, I. (2007). Protecting the Public Interest: The Role of Long-Term Concession Agreements for Providing Transportation Infrastructure (Masters of Science). USC Keston Institute for Public Finance and Infrastructure Policy.
Daganzo, C. (2010). Public Transportation Systems: Basic Principles of System Design, Operations Planning and Real-Time Control. Berkeley, CA: Institute of Transportation Studies University of California. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.298.2924&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Demery, L., & Higgins, W. (2003). Rapid bus and rapid rail: Peak period service supply vs. observed passenger utilization (pp. 1-51). Old Main, PA: PennState University. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.203.5279&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Holmgren, J. (2013). The efficiency of public transport operations: An evaluation using stochastic frontier analysis. Research In Transportation Economics, 39(1), 50-57. Retrieved from https://www.divaportal.org/smash/get/diva2:572705/FULLTEXT01.pdf
McKenzie, B., & Rapino, M. (2011). Commuting in the United States: 2009. Washington D.C.: United States Census Bureau.
Solomon, S., Plattner, G., Knutti, R., & Friedlingstein, P. (2009). Irreversible climate change due to carbon dioxide emissions. PNAS, 106(6), 1704 –1709. Retrieved from http://www.pnas.org/content/106/6/1704.full.pdf
