<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Transport Research International Documentation (TRID)</title>
    <link>https://trid.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://trid.trb.org/Record/RSS?s=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" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <description></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Copyright © 2026. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.</copyright>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <managingEditor>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</webMaster>
    
    <item>
      <title>WORKSHOP 2: THE LOCAL POLICY-MAKER'S ROLE</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/40306</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The purpose of Workshop 2, which viewed the evaluation of urban public transportation from the local policy-maker's perspective, was to explore the following three research areas: (1) examination of organization forms to deliver adequate public transportation services; (2) determination of the current market for public transportation services and evaluation of existing services to ensure that services provided are in step with demands for service; and (3) review of the method of financing transit services that are needed or felt to be needed to meet community goals and objectives.  This report of the proceedings of Workshop 2 identified the following research projects as being necessary for an adequate evaluation of urban public transportation: (1) financing of transit service to meet community goals and objectives; (2) examination of alternative organization forms for delivery of public transportation services; (3) use of marketing technqiues to evaluate transit services; and (4) relation of transit service attributes and consumer preferences.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Oct 1982 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/40306</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>WORKSHOP 3: THE PLANNER'S ROLE</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/40307</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The purpose of Workshop 3, which viewed the evaluation of urban public transportation from the planner's perspective, was to identify the steps in the planning process and to evaluate current ability to perform each of these steps in terms of available procedures and knowledge.  This report of the proceedings of Workshop 3 identified the following research projects as being necessary for an adequate evaluation of urban public transportation: (1) development of a participatory multimode transportation planning process; (2) evaluation of alternative institutional structures and agency responsibilities for transportation planning; (3) deriving goals and objectives for transportation in urban areas; (4) matching transportation system criteria to transportation goals; (5) methodology to match transportation modes to different markets; (6) techniques for segmenting the public transit market; (7) manual of performance and operating characteristics of transit modes; (8) identification and measurement of transportation system costs and benefits; (9) transit and paratransit forecasting techniques; (10) sketch planning techniques for low-captial alternatives; (11) methodology for measuring transportation impacts on land use; and (12) determination of the length of time required for transportation impacts to occur.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 18 Oct 1981 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/40307</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>WORKSHOP 4: THE OPERATOR'S ROLE</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/40308</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The purpose of Workshop 4, which viewed the evaluation of urban public transportation from the operator's perspective, was to examine the following 5 basic subject areas: the elderly and the handicapped, manpower, hardware and equipment, financial, and marketing and management.  This report of the proceedings of Workshop 4 identified the following research projects as being necessary for an adequate evaluation of urban public transportation: (1) planning and design of mass transportation services to meet mobility needs of the elderly and handicapped; (2) study of the merits and problems of combining some transit, school transportation, and goods movement with transit vehicles; (3) evaluation of the purchase of new transit vehicles via the consideration of new-vehicle quality as measured through vehicle maintenance costs; (4) effectiveness of Federal and/or State operating subsidies for urban public transportation; (5) development of effective marketing disciplines for promotion of use of club buses, subscription bus service, special charter group trips, etc.; (6) effect of car pool promotions on transit; (7) evaluation of fare packaging procedures as a tool for inducing transit ridership and reducing the cost associated with the sale and collection of tickets; (8) use of retired and part-time personnel as transit employees; and (9) human resource and development needs for expanding transit services.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 18 Oct 1981 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/40308</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>WORKSHOP 5: THE USER'S PERSPECTIVE</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/40309</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The purpose of Workshop 5, which viewed the evaluation of urban public transportation from the user's perspective, was to identify appropriate dimensions of consumer satisfaction and ways to measure the responsiveness of transportation service to consumer requirements.  This report of the proceedings of Workshop 5 identified the following research projects as being necessary for an adequate evaluation of urban public transportation: (1) measuring the quality of public transportation service; (2) identification of public transportation consumer groups; (3) monitoring and evaluation of public transportation systems; (4) translation of mobility requirements of user groups into specific transportation service characteristics; (5) potential for diversion of automobile commuters to public transportation; (6) information system requirements of transportation system consequences; (7) assessing benefits of a public transportation system for users and the community at large; (8) demand elasticities of user groups as related to service attributes; and (9) measurement of convenience for auto access.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 18 Oct 1981 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/40309</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>WORKSHOP 6: THE COLLECTIVE PERSPECTIVE</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/40310</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Workshop 6 was the "collective group" and viewed the problem of evaluating urban public transportation from many different perspectives.  Due to the breadth of the subject area, the problem could not be dealt with as comprehensively as desired.  Nevertheless, the following research projects were identified as being necessary for an adequate evaluation of urban public transportation: (1) effects of the absence or decline of scheduled public transportation services on those who are expected to be dependent on transit; (2) benefits of transforming institutional constraints to incentives for innovative transit service; (3) economic impact of labor practices on transit efficiency and the implications of current trends; (4) improved techniques for identifying and serving transit market requirements; (5) benefits of the transit system stratified by city size (not limited to dollar measures); (6) advantages of scheduling activities in which transit users engage to be more compatible with efficient transit operations; (7) transit alternatives for non-CBD travel; (8) development of measures and standards to assist definitions of travel service levels; (9) development of aggregate measures providing comparison between cities of levels of services; (10) identification and development of standard definitions and techniques for collecting data required for evaluation and performance measures; (11) development of standardized benefit measures for transit evaluation; (12) public transportation versus other community services and facilities; (13) classification of alternative service concepts and identification of major similarities and differences in layman's terms; (14) analysis of the relationship between transit system evaluation measures and the variables being controlled that affect the evaluation measures; and (15) development of guidelines for methodology and research design for the evaluation of transit service demonstrations and trials of innovations.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 18 Oct 1981 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/40310</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>RESEARCH NEEDS FOR EVALUATING URBAN PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/40298</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This Special Report contains the results of a 3-day conference organized by the Committee on Public Transportation Planning and Development of the Transportation Research Board to devote attention to the research needed for evaluating urban public transportation. There is an introductory surveys of the need for evaluation of urban public transportation, followed by the five formal papers presented to the conference as a setting for workshop discussions.  Part III of the Special Report contains the workshop reports describing the general discussions and any consensus reached.  Part IV contains the 57 research project statements which were the important products of the workshop groups.   The research statements were developed independently by the individual workshops, and thus there are certain overlaps in various tasks of the research called for.  An index is provided as a cross-reference to the subject topics of the research project statements.  The conferees were not reticent in designation of costs, priorities, and establishment of research urgency.  The total suggested costs to undertaken all the identified research in the 57 projects amount to nearly $8,000,000.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 18 Oct 1981 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/40298</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>THE NEED FOR EVALUATION</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/40299</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The basic steps involved in the urban transportation planning process are reviewed, along with past efforts which to date have proved unsuccessful in establishing a viable public transportation system.  From this review, the necessity for a meaningful evaluation of public transportation at all levels of government is apparent. For this purpose a conference was organized.  Its objectives, as stated in this introduction to the proceedings, were as follows: (1) to provide all attendees with a better understanding of the perspectives and needs of the users, transit authority boards, planners, operators, and grantors; (2) to identify current approaches being used by each of these groups to evaluate performance; (3) to identify steps that need to be taken to provide information necessary to plan, design, operate, finance, and effectively evaluate public transportation; and (4) to identify research projects, complete with work statements, that are needed to increase the effectiveness of each of the groups as they interact to fulfill their respective roles.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 18 Oct 1981 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/40299</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>EFFECTIVE TRANSIT POLICY-MAKING AT THE LOCAL LEVEL</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/40300</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This paper reviews the role of Transit Authority Boards in the urban transportation planning process.  The Transit Authority Board is seen as having two major responsibilities: (1) it serves as the focal point of citizen input to the urban public transportation planning process; and (2) it is responsible for seeing that an adequate level of public transportation service is provided to the community.  The various steps involved in making policy decisions in order to fulfill these responsibilities are discussed.  It is emphasized that care must be taken to develop means of evaluating various combinations of public transportation instead of simply developing measures to justify current activities and vested interests.  The Knoxville Transit Authority's efforts to solve the problems they have encountered are cited as an example of the need for evaluation measures that will help determine whether an adequate level of transportation service is being provided to the community and whether the service is being provided in the most effective way.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 18 Oct 1981 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/40300</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>A PLANNING PERSPECTIVE ON EVALUATING URBAN PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/40301</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The first part of this paper outlines some of the basic differences between highway and transit planning which should be recognized and accounted for if successful public transportation operations are to be achieved.  In the second part of the paper, several steps to be followed for achieving a meaningful evaluation of public transportation systems are discussed.  These steps are as follows: (1) establish specific and quantifiable goals and objectives for public transportation; (2) select alternative means of accomplishing the objectives; (3) define the criteria that will be used to evaluate an alternative in terms of meeting the objectives; (4) firmly establish the constraints under which the objectives are to be accomplished; and (5) develop the methodologies to be used in evaluation of each alternative.  It is pointed out that these steps are applicable at all levels of government.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 18 Oct 1981 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/40301</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>TRANSIT ANALYSIS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/40302</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Using the transportation problems faced by California as examples of the problems which various transportation planning agencies might be faced with, this paper points out some of the areas where there is a need for evaluation criteria.  It is found that such criteria are needed for defining roles, for judging the adequacy of existing and proposed programs, for resolving the debates between facility and service strategies and between the commuter and the transit-dependent, and for help in analyzing the impact of labor costs and the role of the private sector.  Also, evaluation criteria are needed that will allow people at the neighborhood level to control the institutions providing transit service.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 18 Oct 1981 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/40302</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>EVALUATING PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION FOR EFFECTIVE DECISION-MAKING</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/40303</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This paper views evaluation criteria in the transportation planning process from the operator's perspective.  It is concluded that evaluation criteria for goals objectives, and responsibilities must be designed to permit innovation in organization structure, facilities, operating procedures and practices, and service promotion, merchandising, and marketing.  A table is presented showing evaluation criteria from the operator's perspective.  It is organized according to the following three major areas of concern: organization, facilities, and operations.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 18 Oct 1981 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/40303</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>A PARATRANSIT PERSPECTIVE ON EVALUATION OF URBAN PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/40304</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This paper points to the need to provide transportation service that responds to the articulated needs and demands of the traveling public, and states that formal evaluation cannot do much to improve this aspect of urban mobility.  A marketplace evaluation mechanism is proposed, whereby the public by its consumption choices will provide an evaluation that reflects the true needs and demands of the traveling public.  The traveling public is divided into three fundamental groups: the transportationally disadvantaged; individuals who have ready access to private automobiles and whose travel does not involve travel to a major activity center; and the large population group who drive their automobile as commuters between home and a major activity center in the morning and return in the evening, referred to as the RAC/MAC group.  This latter group is viewed as the fundamental challenge to the public transportation system, and the need is seen for a much richer variety of possible ride-sharing arrangements or paratransit services.  It is suggested that an evaluation of new paratransit modes be conducted by the marketplace process.  Those that attract RAC/MAC passengers can be judged to be successful; those that fail to do so, regardless of their performance on explicit evaluation criteria, cannot be considered successful.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 18 Oct 1981 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/40304</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>WORKSHOP 1: THE GRANTOR'S ROLE</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/40305</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The purpose of Workshop 1, which viewed the evaluation of urban public transportation from the grantor's perspective, was to seek answers to the following questions: (1) What is the appropriate distribution of transportation resources among the various transport modes?  (2) What is a rational and equitable basis for allocating (and distributing) transit resources among client groups? (3) What are the appropriate measures of performance for transit systems, i.e., what does a grantor use to judge good and bad performance among client transit systems? (4) What are the attitudinal and motivational factors that influence transit patronage and what is the proper (ethical) use of these factors? (5) How does one design a financial aid program that appropriately encourages (rewards) service and discourages (penalizes) inefficiency and resource waste? This report of the proceedings of Workshop 1 identified the following research projects as being necessary for an adequate evaluation of urban public transportation:(1) classification of urban areas; (2) development of methodologies for assessing and evaluating alternative mobility systems in urban areas; (3) identification of rural transit needs and methods of meeting these needs; (4) public transit operational and managerial training needs; (5) motivational research needs related to modal choice decisions; (6) investigation of the feasibility of establishing a "Transportation Broker" through a case study; (7) development of appropriate roles for various levels of government; and (8) identification of potential for private sector to satisfy public transportation needs.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 18 Oct 1981 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/40305</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>