What is a major flaw in how most jurisdictions currently set public transport fares and subsidies?

Question

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

Question restatement: What is a major flaw in how most jurisdictions currently set public transport fares and subsidies?

Given data: The answer field shows option 'd. Pricing strategies often fail to address equity or efficiency in a systematic way', but there are no additional answer options provided to evaluate against; thus, we only have this single option to consider.

Analysis of option d:
- This choice argues that fare and subsidy pricing lacks a systematic approach to equity and efficiency. In other words, policies are not consistently designed to balance fairness (who pays and who benefits) with economic efficiency (cost recovery, incentivizing appropriate use, and minimizing negative externalities).
- Why this can be true: many jurisdictions rely on politically driven subsidies, cross-subsidization, or utilization-based pricing without a formal framework to measure equity impacts (e.g., how low-income riders are served) or efficiency outcomes (e.g., budgetary efficiency, optimal ridership, congestion effects).
- Implications: without a systematic framework, subsidies may be regressive, over- or under-allocate resources, and fail to signal true costs or incentivize desirable travel behavior.

If there were other options, we would evaluate them as follows:
- A hypothetical option claiming pricing is perfectly equitable would be incorrect because, in practice, fare structures often place a larger relative burden on certain groups or misalign incentives.
- A hypothetical option suggesting pricing targets revenue without considering social benefits would also be flawed, since comprehensive transport pricing should factor both financial sustainability and social objectives.
- A hypothetical option asserting pricing is solely based on distance or cost recovery would miss the broader policy goals (equity, access, demand management).

In sum, option d points to a structural weakness: pricing and subsidies are not always anchored in a coherent framework that simultaneously addresses who benefits, who pays, and how resources are allocated efficiently. This aligns with common critiques in public transport policy literature, where equity and efficiency considerations are often not systematically integrated into fare design and subsidy allocation.

PLAN7145-City Building - Infrastructure (T2, 2025)

What is a major flaw in how most jurisdictions currently set public transport fares and subsidies?

View Explanation

Log in for full answers

Similar Questions

What is a major flaw in how most jurisdictions currently set public transport fares and subsidies?

In a consumer society, many adults channel creativity into buying things

Economic stress and unpredictable times have resulted in a booming industry for self-help products

People born without creativity never can develop it

A product has a selling price of $20, a contribution margin ratio of 40% and fixed cost of $120,000. To make a profit of $30,000. The number of units that must be sold is: Type the number without $ and a comma. Eg: 20000

Which of the following statement regarding cost is correct:

Under the assumptions used in cost-volume-profit analysis, as the activity increases:

The CVP and break-even analysis are supported by a range of important assumptions. Which of the following is not an assumption of the CVP:

More Practical Tools for Students Powered by AI Study Helper

Homework AI Solver

Stylized AI Paper Writer

Plagiarism Checker Assistant

Citation AI Academic Writing Tool

In-Class Translation Assistant

AI Note Generator

AI Quiz Answers

Past Exam Questions from University Test Bank

Smart Practice Assistant

Adaptive Practice

Making Your Study Simpler