What U.S. Public Transportation Can Learn From Germany
The impact of World War II on public transportation in the U.S. and Germany:
Impact of World War II on Public Transportation in the U.S.:
After WWII, public transport use in the U.S. went from 16.4 billion trips in 1945 to 4.7 billion trips by 1973. The decline was caused by an end to rationing fuel and tires, and car production resumed as factories were no longer used to produce military vehicles. Car ownership increased throughout the 1950s and 1960s and as demand for transport waned, so did public financing. This led to rising fares for service that was poorly maintained and inefficient, leading bankruptcies of public transport companies throughout the US. In the 1970s, the federal government began to support public transport, which led to greater public demand for services. By 2010, transport use rose to 7.2 billion passengers. However, overall population growth called for more government funds to keep up with demand (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 545-546).
Impact of World War II on Public Transportation in Germany:
In Germany after WWII, public transportation rose greatly between 1950 and 1956. Most of the public transportation infrastructure was destroyed as a result of the war, but by the 1950s, much of this was repaired and in use again. In the 1950s, West Germany’s economy was on the way to a recovery, and because car ownership was low at 80 cars per 1000 people, most people relied on public transportation to get to work. Additionally, “...after the Second World War, over 6 million ethnic Germans from Poland, Czechoslovakia, and other Soviet-occupied countries in Eastern Europe fled to West Germany” (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 546). With increases in population, and high employment combined with low car ownership, the demand for public transport quickly rose in the 1950s. More of the population began to own cars in the late 1960s, which led to a slight decline in the demand for public transit as West Germany made an economic recovery. By 1968, there were 230 cars per 1000 people (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 546).
As German reunification occurred, from 1991 to 2010, studies show an increase from 9.2 billion passengers to 11.5 billion, but mostly in West Germany. In former East Germany, between 1990 and 2000 public transportation fell from 24% to 12% of all rides. However, since the 2000s, demand for transport has increased throughout all of Germany (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 547). This is due to the increase of the gasoline tax from $0.41 / litre in 1990 to $0.88/litre in 2010. Furthermore, public transit systems saw great improvement in services “through regional coordination of ticketing and timetables, new vehicles, real-time information at stations and on vehicles, and discounted monthly, semester, and annual tickets” (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 547).
Public transit for all?
Studies show that the poorest income quartile in both Germany and the USA use public transport far more than other income groups. This is because those with lower incomes are less likely to own a car. According to Demand for Public Transport in Germany and the USA: An Analysis of Rider Characteristics, "In 2001/2002, public transport use for the second, third, and highest income quartiles was almost identical within each country, but about six times greater in Germany than in the USA (about 1.0% in the USA versus 6.5% in Germany)” (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 553). Moreover, “In 2008/2009, public transport’s share of trips in the two highest income quartiles was eight times greater in Germany than in the USA. Even more strikingly, Germans in the highest income quartile rode public transport at twice the rate of Americans in the lowest income quartile (8.4% versus 4.2%)” (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 553).
Interestingly enough, how people are taught to ride the bus can impact use. For instance, in 2008/2009, education as a reason for public transport use was twice as high in Germany as in the USA, 24.7 percent versus 11.6 percent (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 550). This is because in the US, school systems usually provide their own school buses, while German school children mostly use public transportation to ride to school. In 2010, there were five times more school buses in the US than public buses. The article suggests that the “lack of American school children’s experience with public transport probably discourages their use of public transport later in life as well. By comparison, many German children learn how to use public transport on their daily trips to school, thus facilitating their use of public transport as adults” (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 551).
Public Transit Policy in Germany vs. USA:
Public transport agencies in Germany seem to be more successful at being more financially efficient, compared to the U.S. In 2010, the operating and capital subsidy per passenger trip was $1.82 in Germany versus $5.09 in the US. Moreover, “[p]assenger revenues in Germany covered 77% of public transport operating costs compared with only 33% in the USA” (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 557).
What is the best way to increase demand for public transportation? According to the article, “[s]uch measures fall into the three general categories of (1) expanded and improved service; (2) attractive fares and convenient ticketing; and (3) regional and multimodal coordination of services and fares” (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 557). Furthermore, complementary policies that enourage the use of public transportation, such as policies restricting car use or increasing the price of driving a car, are necessary. It is also important to make sure stations and housing are in close proximity. Public transportation is largely so popular in Germany because “…88% of Germans live within 1 km of a public transportation stop, compared with only 43% of Americans” (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 557).
Ways to Expand and Improve Service:
Germany has modernized vehicles, which improves the overall comfort and reliability of public transportation, and routes and schedules are integrated across different modes of transportation, allowing for more convenient connections for passengers (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 557). Real-time information about arrival and departure times are available for rail, metro, light rail, trains, and buses. Germany also has bus-only lanes and express buses. Some German cities such as Freiburg have traffic signals that give priority to buses and light rail over cars (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 560).
How to Make Fares Attractive:
Most transportation in Germany has “integrated daily, weekly, monthly, semester, and annual tickets, which allow passengers to use one ticket for the entire trip, regardless of the number of transfers and public transport modes used during the trip.” Furthermore, there are discounted tickets available for school children, seniors, and university students (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 560). Monthly tickets cost on average 60 percent less per ride than single trip fares, and annual tickets offer discounts from 10 to 25 percent, in order to attract long term users. Furthermore, there are even group tickets for groups up to five travellers that cost 30 euros per day, allowing for the use of regional and local transport services on weekends, holidays, and off-peak periods. Smart cards are also becoming more readily available allowing for convenient recharging of tickets, and tickets are also available via mobile phone (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 560).
How to Integrate and Coordinate Services:
German transport services have fully coordinated routes, fares, and schedules within metropolitan regions. They are able to do so by having regional public transit organizations that integrate all public transit operations, including ticketing. Transfers between bus and rail can be easily made with coordinated schedules that are made to minimize wait time, and bus stops are placed near rail stations to minimize walking time for transfers. As a result of having a more organized system, “Between 1991 and 2010, metropolitan areas with public transport authorities, such as Berlin, Freiburg, Hamburg, Munich, Rhein-Main, and Stuttgart reported increases of at least 20% in passenger volumes” (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 561). Moreover, by lowering the speedlimit in “neighborhood streets to 30 km/h or less, establishing car-free zones in their centres, and expanding networks of separate bike paths and lanes” (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 561) cities are able to allow riders to reach public transport more conveniently by bike or foot. This is not a system that only works for smaller cities, and “…even large cities such as Berlin and Munich have traffic calmed over 75% of their road networks” (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 561).
Other Tools to Reduce Congestion/Increase Demand for Public Transportation:
Restrict Car Ownership:
In 2010, gasoline was taxed four times as high in Germany as in the U.S., or 60 percent compared to 15 percent (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 561). Moreover, “[s]ales taxes on new vehicle purchases were four times higher in Germany than in the USA” (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 561). German road users also pay higher taxes and fees than in the U.S. (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 561). Roads per capita is much less in German cities, compared to American cities, and highways rarely go through city centers in Germany. Parking is also reduced in Germany, and the cost for parking is higher. American cities, on the other hand, continue to increase low cost or free parking (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 562). Many German cities also have car free zones, which is rare in America except for pedestrian malls. All of these factors combined helps to make public transportation more attractive than car driving to customers (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 562).
Land Use Policies:
German land use laws encourage more dense, mixed-use settlements, while in the U.S., land use plans require single-use zoning. When higher population density is combined with mixed land use, short travel distances between stops, trip starts, and end destinations are enabled (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 562).
Negative Aspects of Public Transportation in Germany:
Most rail systems were built in the 1960s and 1970s and will require renovation; however, funding for this has not yet been decided because it is unclear how much local, state, and federal will contribute. Furthermore, cutting the costs of public transit has reduced the amount of subsidies required, but has impacted the labor behind public transit by reducing wages and increasing work time and responsibilities. This has caused labor strikes within the past ten years, disrupting service and proving at times unreliable for customers (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 562). Moreover, cutbacks in maintenance and downsizing the labor force has led to some disruptions in service, as some vehicles are found to have defects before they have been replaced. Additional issues include crimes that can occur as passengers wait at rail stations, as well as vandalism of rail cars and buses (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 563).
Impact of World War II on Public Transportation in the U.S.:
After WWII, public transport use in the U.S. went from 16.4 billion trips in 1945 to 4.7 billion trips by 1973. The decline was caused by an end to rationing fuel and tires, and car production resumed as factories were no longer used to produce military vehicles. Car ownership increased throughout the 1950s and 1960s and as demand for transport waned, so did public financing. This led to rising fares for service that was poorly maintained and inefficient, leading bankruptcies of public transport companies throughout the US. In the 1970s, the federal government began to support public transport, which led to greater public demand for services. By 2010, transport use rose to 7.2 billion passengers. However, overall population growth called for more government funds to keep up with demand (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 545-546).
Impact of World War II on Public Transportation in Germany:
In Germany after WWII, public transportation rose greatly between 1950 and 1956. Most of the public transportation infrastructure was destroyed as a result of the war, but by the 1950s, much of this was repaired and in use again. In the 1950s, West Germany’s economy was on the way to a recovery, and because car ownership was low at 80 cars per 1000 people, most people relied on public transportation to get to work. Additionally, “...after the Second World War, over 6 million ethnic Germans from Poland, Czechoslovakia, and other Soviet-occupied countries in Eastern Europe fled to West Germany” (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 546). With increases in population, and high employment combined with low car ownership, the demand for public transport quickly rose in the 1950s. More of the population began to own cars in the late 1960s, which led to a slight decline in the demand for public transit as West Germany made an economic recovery. By 1968, there were 230 cars per 1000 people (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 546).
As German reunification occurred, from 1991 to 2010, studies show an increase from 9.2 billion passengers to 11.5 billion, but mostly in West Germany. In former East Germany, between 1990 and 2000 public transportation fell from 24% to 12% of all rides. However, since the 2000s, demand for transport has increased throughout all of Germany (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 547). This is due to the increase of the gasoline tax from $0.41 / litre in 1990 to $0.88/litre in 2010. Furthermore, public transit systems saw great improvement in services “through regional coordination of ticketing and timetables, new vehicles, real-time information at stations and on vehicles, and discounted monthly, semester, and annual tickets” (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 547).
Transportation in the U.S. vs. Germany: a brief overview
According to Buehler and Pucher (2012), public transportation is more successful in Germany compared to the U.S. as a whole, and controlling for demographics, socio-economic, and land use, Germans are still five times more likely as Americans to use public transportation. Furthermore, the German transit system has a greater amount of users that cross economic, sociological, and ethnic boundaries, and the system can be used for a greater diversity of travel purposes. It is argued that this is because of mutually supportive policies “that include the following: (1) more and better service, (2) attractive fares and convenient ticketing, (3) full multimodal and regional integration, (4) high taxes and restrictions on car use, and (5) land-use policies that promote compact, mixed-use developments” (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 541).
Public transit for all?
Studies show that the poorest income quartile in both Germany and the USA use public transport far more than other income groups. This is because those with lower incomes are less likely to own a car. According to Demand for Public Transport in Germany and the USA: An Analysis of Rider Characteristics, "In 2001/2002, public transport use for the second, third, and highest income quartiles was almost identical within each country, but about six times greater in Germany than in the USA (about 1.0% in the USA versus 6.5% in Germany)” (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 553). Moreover, “In 2008/2009, public transport’s share of trips in the two highest income quartiles was eight times greater in Germany than in the USA. Even more strikingly, Germans in the highest income quartile rode public transport at twice the rate of Americans in the lowest income quartile (8.4% versus 4.2%)” (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 553).
German public transportation appeals to groups of all incomes. This is further indicated by a study from 2008/2009, which revealed: "bus and rail passengers in Germany had the same median income as each other and the national average" (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 553). In contrast, there was a considerable difference found in the incomes of rail passengers and bus passengers in the United States. The study claims: “In the USA, rail passengers had the highest incomes of any modal user group and considerably higher than national average income. In sharp contrast, bus passengers had incomes that were only a third of national average income” (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 553). This is because in the US, rail services usually run from wealthy suburbs to downtown business centers, while poorer neighborhoods are offered a slower, less effective bus service (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 554). The stigma attached to buses as being the transportation of “last resort” or of the poor and ethnic minorities does not help to integrate bus and rail uses by people of all economic backgrounds (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 554).
Interestingly enough, how people are taught to ride the bus can impact use. For instance, in 2008/2009, education as a reason for public transport use was twice as high in Germany as in the USA, 24.7 percent versus 11.6 percent (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 550). This is because in the US, school systems usually provide their own school buses, while German school children mostly use public transportation to ride to school. In 2010, there were five times more school buses in the US than public buses. The article suggests that the “lack of American school children’s experience with public transport probably discourages their use of public transport later in life as well. By comparison, many German children learn how to use public transport on their daily trips to school, thus facilitating their use of public transport as adults” (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 551).
Public Transit Policy in Germany vs. USA:
Public transport agencies in Germany seem to be more successful at being more financially efficient, compared to the U.S. In 2010, the operating and capital subsidy per passenger trip was $1.82 in Germany versus $5.09 in the US. Moreover, “[p]assenger revenues in Germany covered 77% of public transport operating costs compared with only 33% in the USA” (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 557).
What is the best way to increase demand for public transportation? According to the article, “[s]uch measures fall into the three general categories of (1) expanded and improved service; (2) attractive fares and convenient ticketing; and (3) regional and multimodal coordination of services and fares” (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 557). Furthermore, complementary policies that enourage the use of public transportation, such as policies restricting car use or increasing the price of driving a car, are necessary. It is also important to make sure stations and housing are in close proximity. Public transportation is largely so popular in Germany because “…88% of Germans live within 1 km of a public transportation stop, compared with only 43% of Americans” (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 557).
Ways to Expand and Improve Service:
Germany has modernized vehicles, which improves the overall comfort and reliability of public transportation, and routes and schedules are integrated across different modes of transportation, allowing for more convenient connections for passengers (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 557). Real-time information about arrival and departure times are available for rail, metro, light rail, trains, and buses. Germany also has bus-only lanes and express buses. Some German cities such as Freiburg have traffic signals that give priority to buses and light rail over cars (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 560).
How to Make Fares Attractive:
Most transportation in Germany has “integrated daily, weekly, monthly, semester, and annual tickets, which allow passengers to use one ticket for the entire trip, regardless of the number of transfers and public transport modes used during the trip.” Furthermore, there are discounted tickets available for school children, seniors, and university students (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 560). Monthly tickets cost on average 60 percent less per ride than single trip fares, and annual tickets offer discounts from 10 to 25 percent, in order to attract long term users. Furthermore, there are even group tickets for groups up to five travellers that cost 30 euros per day, allowing for the use of regional and local transport services on weekends, holidays, and off-peak periods. Smart cards are also becoming more readily available allowing for convenient recharging of tickets, and tickets are also available via mobile phone (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 560).
How to Integrate and Coordinate Services:
German transport services have fully coordinated routes, fares, and schedules within metropolitan regions. They are able to do so by having regional public transit organizations that integrate all public transit operations, including ticketing. Transfers between bus and rail can be easily made with coordinated schedules that are made to minimize wait time, and bus stops are placed near rail stations to minimize walking time for transfers. As a result of having a more organized system, “Between 1991 and 2010, metropolitan areas with public transport authorities, such as Berlin, Freiburg, Hamburg, Munich, Rhein-Main, and Stuttgart reported increases of at least 20% in passenger volumes” (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 561). Moreover, by lowering the speedlimit in “neighborhood streets to 30 km/h or less, establishing car-free zones in their centres, and expanding networks of separate bike paths and lanes” (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 561) cities are able to allow riders to reach public transport more conveniently by bike or foot. This is not a system that only works for smaller cities, and “…even large cities such as Berlin and Munich have traffic calmed over 75% of their road networks” (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 561).
Other Tools to Reduce Congestion/Increase Demand for Public Transportation:
Restrict Car Ownership:
In 2010, gasoline was taxed four times as high in Germany as in the U.S., or 60 percent compared to 15 percent (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 561). Moreover, “[s]ales taxes on new vehicle purchases were four times higher in Germany than in the USA” (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 561). German road users also pay higher taxes and fees than in the U.S. (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 561). Roads per capita is much less in German cities, compared to American cities, and highways rarely go through city centers in Germany. Parking is also reduced in Germany, and the cost for parking is higher. American cities, on the other hand, continue to increase low cost or free parking (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 562). Many German cities also have car free zones, which is rare in America except for pedestrian malls. All of these factors combined helps to make public transportation more attractive than car driving to customers (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 562).
Land Use Policies:
German land use laws encourage more dense, mixed-use settlements, while in the U.S., land use plans require single-use zoning. When higher population density is combined with mixed land use, short travel distances between stops, trip starts, and end destinations are enabled (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 562).
Negative Aspects of Public Transportation in Germany:
Most rail systems were built in the 1960s and 1970s and will require renovation; however, funding for this has not yet been decided because it is unclear how much local, state, and federal will contribute. Furthermore, cutting the costs of public transit has reduced the amount of subsidies required, but has impacted the labor behind public transit by reducing wages and increasing work time and responsibilities. This has caused labor strikes within the past ten years, disrupting service and proving at times unreliable for customers (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 562). Moreover, cutbacks in maintenance and downsizing the labor force has led to some disruptions in service, as some vehicles are found to have defects before they have been replaced. Additional issues include crimes that can occur as passengers wait at rail stations, as well as vandalism of rail cars and buses (Buehler & Pucher, 2012, p. 563).
| Previous page on path | Improving Public Transportation in Los Angeles, page 9 of 12 | Next page on path |
Discussion of "What U.S. Public Transportation Can Learn From Germany"
Add your voice to this discussion.
Checking your signed in status ...