OTTAWA - Cost Effectiveness:
Operating Cost per Revenue Passenger
Inflation-Adjusted Annual Operating Cost per Revenue Passenger (2002 CAD)
Operating Cost per Revenue Rider
|
1982
|
1987
|
1992
|
1997
|
2002
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2002 CAD
|
1.59
|
1.92
|
2.19
|
2.16
|
2.03
|
2002 USD
|
US$ 1.01
|
US$ 1.22
|
US$ 1.40
|
US$ 1.38
|
US$ 1.29
|
Index (1982 = 100)
|
100
|
121
|
138
|
136
|
128
|
Rider km per Revenue Rider
|
8.7
|
10.0
|
10.0
|
10.0
|
10.0
|
Rider mi per Revenue Rider
|
5.4
|
6.2
|
6.2
|
6.2
|
6.2
|
Index (1982 = 100)
|
100
|
114
|
115
|
115
|
115
|
The increase in inflation-adjusted unit cost per passenger, whether “revenue passenger,” (“linked trip”) or “boarding” (“unlinked trip”), may be explained in part by changes in average travel distance (ATD). The number of “rider km per revenue rider” increased by 14 percent from 1982 to 1987, but remained stable thereafter.
Operating Cost per Boarding
Inflation-Adjusted Annual Operating Cost per Boarding (2002 CAD)
Operating Cost per Boarding
|
1982
|
1987
|
1992
|
1997
|
2002
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2002 CAD
|
1.23
|
1.37
|
1.56
|
1.54
|
1.45
|
2002 USD
|
US$ 0.78
|
US$ 0.87
|
US$ 0.99
|
US$ 0.98
|
US$ 0.92
|
Index (1982 = 100)
|
100
|
111
|
126
|
126
|
118
|
Rider km per Boarding
|
6.8
|
7.1
|
7.1
|
7.2
|
7.2
|
Rider mi per Boarding
|
4.2
|
4.4
|
4.4
|
4.4
|
4.4
|
Index (1982 = 100)
|
100
|
105
|
105
|
106
|
106
|
With few exceptions (e.g. Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County, Texas [Houston], most U.S. transit undertakings do not report “revenue passenger” (“linked trip”) statistics. The chart and table above were included for consistency with prevailing U.S. practice. However, readers are advised that direct comparisons between OC Transpo unit operating costs and those reported by U.S. systems may be misleading. Labor accounts for roughly 80 percent of total transit operating cost, and average U.S. wage rates are higher than those paid in Canada. Conversion between currencies does not incorporate adjustment for differences in wage levels between countries.
Operating Cost per Passenger-km
Inflation-Adjusted Annual Operating Cost per Passenger-km (“Rider km;” 2002 CAD)
Operating Cost per Rider km
|
1982
|
1987
|
1992
|
1997
|
2002
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2002 CAD
|
0.182
|
0.193
|
0.219
|
0.216
|
0.203
|
Operating Cost per Rider mi, 2002 USD
|
US$ 0.19
|
US$ 0.20
|
US$ 0.22
|
US$ 0.22
|
US$ 0.21
|
Index (1982 = 100)
|
100
|
106
|
120
|
118
|
111
|
Operating cost per passenger-kilometer is the fundamental indicator of public transport cost-effectiveness. OC Transpo managed to hold increases in this “consumption-side” unit cost indicator below the levels of “supply-side” unit cost increases. This fact reflects management’s success at improving service effectiveness to a degree that partially offset declining cost efficiency and declining productivity.
Trends - Cost Effectiveness (“Consumption-side” indicators):
Inflation-adjusted annual operating cost per passenger and per passenger-km
(1982 = 100)
The undertaking experienced sharp increases in unit operating costs from 1982, but managed to reverse this trend after 1992. However, in “real” (inflation-adjusted) terms, consumption-side unit operating costs remained 6-15 percent higher at 2002 than at 1992.
Cost Recovery: Average Fare per Passenger and per km
Inflation-Adjusted Average Fare Paid (2002 CAD)
Average Fare Paid
|
1982
|
1987
|
1992
|
1997
|
2002
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Per Passenger, 2002 CAD
|
0.909
|
1.054
|
1.195
|
1.231
|
1.150
|
2002 USD
|
US$ 0.579
|
US$ 0.671
|
US$ 0.761
|
US$ 0.784
|
US$ 0.732
|
Index (1982 = 100)
|
100
|
116
|
131
|
135
|
126
|
Per km, 2002 CAD
|
0.105
|
0.105
|
0.119
|
0.123
|
0.115
|
per mi, 2002 USD
|
US$ 0.107
|
US$ 0.108
|
US$ 0.123
|
US$ 0.126
|
US$ 0.118
|
Index (1982 = 100)
|
100
|
101
|
114
|
118
|
110
|
Given significant increases in operating costs, transit managements have few strategies other than increasing real fares (absent increases in operating efficiency, productivity - or subsidy). Changes in average fare paid per kilometer lagged behind the increase in average fare paid per passenger during 1982-1987, reflecting the increase in “rider km per rider” during this period.
Trends - Cost Effectiveness and Cost Recovery:
(1982 = 100)
Over the long term, OC Transpo increased real fares per passenger and per km in proportion with increases in real unit operating costs. Cost recovery (revenue : cost ratio) remained quite stable during this period, within the range of 55-60 percent.