Valuing Convenience in Public
Transport in Korean Context

17

Discussion Paper 2013 • 17
Sungwon Lee, Ph.D.
The Korea Transport InstituteValuing Convenience in Public Transport in
the Korean Context

Discussion Paper No. 2013-17

Prepared for the Roundtable on
Valuing convenience in public transport(12-13 September 2013, Paris)

Sungwon LEE
The Korea Transport Institute, Goyang-si, Korea

September 2013

THE INTERNATIONAL TRANSPORT FORUM
The International Transport Forum at the OECD is an intergovernmental organisation with
54 member countries. It acts as a strategic think-tank, with the objective of helping shape
the transport policy agenda on a global level and ensuring that it contributes to economic
growth, environmental protection, social inclusion and the preservation of human life andwell-being. The International Transport Forum organises an annual summit of Ministers
along with leading representatives from industry, civil society and academia.
The International Transport Forum was created under a Declaration issued by the Councilof Ministers of the ECMT (European Conference of Ministers of Transport) at its Ministerial
Session in May 2006 under the legal authority of the Protocol of the ECMT, signed in
Brussels on 17 October 1953, and legal instruments of the OECD.
The Members of the Forum are: Albania, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus,
Belgium, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, China, Croatia, the Czech Republic,
Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, FYROM, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland,
India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Korea, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta,
Mexico, Moldova, Montenegro, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal,
Romania, Russia, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine,
the United Kingdom and the United States.
The International Transport Forum’s Research Centre gathers statistics and conducts
co-operative research programmes addressing all modes of transport. Its findings arewidely disseminated and support policymaking in Member countries as well as contributing
to the annual summit.
Discussion Papers
The International Transport Forum’s Discussion Paper Series makes economic research,commissioned or carried out at its Research Centre, available to researchers andpractitioners. The aim is to contribute to the understanding of the transport sector and toprovide inputs to transport policy design. The Discussion Papers are not edited by theInternational Transport Forum and they reflect the author's opinions alone.
The Discussion Papers can be downloaded from:www.internationaltransportforum.org/jtrc/DiscussionPapers/jtrcpapers.html
The International Transport Forum’s website is at: www.internationaltransportforum.org
For further information on the Discussion Papers and other JTRC activities, please email:itf.contact@oecd.org

This document and any map included herein are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory,
to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area.

VALUING CONVENIENCE IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN THE KOREAN CONTEXTABSTRACT

Public transport patronage has been continuously declining in major Korean cities aslevels of car ownership rise. Public transport has lost its competitive edge to private cars
because people tend to prefer more convenient modes as their income increases. A
promising way to reverse this trend is to provide more convenient modes of transport interms of travel times and amenity. In Korea, we have implemented several policy
measures aimed at increasing the attractiveness of public transport by reducing travel
times and by providing more seats, etc. This paper analyses the post-policy impacts ofthese measures and compares the results with those of an ex ante quantitative policy
effectiveness analysis. The main policy implication from the empirical analysis is that
increasing the convenience level of public transport can be an effective way to increase
public transport patronage. The measures to achieve this include reducing public
transport travel times by increasing speeds or reducing headways, and by enhancing
amenity levels. Following the reform of Seoul’s public transport system, which reduced
travel times by introducing exclusive median bus lanes and integrated public transport
fares, we have actually seen an increase in the number of public transport users.

Sungwon Lee — Discussion Paper 2013-17 — © OECD/ITF 2013

3

VALUING CONVENIENCE IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN THE KOREAN CONTEXTTABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................................................7
2. RATIONALE BEHIND PUBLIC TRANSPORT POLICY REFORM IN KOREA .....................9
3. SEOUL’S PUBLIC TRANSPORT SYSTEM .............................................................................15
4. SEOUL PUBLIC TRANSPORT REFORM ACHIEVEMENTS ................................................17
5. SUMMARY AND RESULTS OF THE REFORM OF PUBLIC TRANSPORT SERVICES ....21
REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................................23

Sungwon Lee — Discussion Paper 2013-17 — © OECD/ITF 2013

5

VALUING CONVENIENCE IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN THE KOREAN CONTEXT

1. INTRODUCTION

Public transport services such as urban rail and buses are regarded as energy-efficientand environmentally friendly forms of transportation in many cities around the world.
However, public transport patronage has been continuously declining in major Koreancities in response to rising levels of car ownership. Public transport has lost its
competitive edge to private cars because people tend to prefer more convenient modes
as their income rises. A promising way to reverse this trend is to provide moreconvenient modes of transport in terms of time and amenity. In Korea we have
implemented several policy measures aimed at increasing the attractiveness of public
transport by reducing travel times and providing more seats, etc. This paper analyses thepost-policy impacts of these measures which it then compares with the results of an ex
ante quantitative policy effectiveness analysis. Policy implications will be drawn from theanalysis.
Seoul, the capital city of Korea, conducted a major reform of its public transportsystem in 2004. The major components of this reform were the large-scale deploymentof exclusive median bus lanes and the introduction of an integrated public transport faresystem in which fares are charged according to the distance travelled, regardless oftransport mode, by allowing free transfers between subways and buses. This fare system
is designed to consist in a base fare which applies to the first 12 km of travel and anincremental fare reflecting the additional distance travelled. The result has been aresounding success. The reform has not only reversed the trend decline in public
transport usage but has also increased the popularity of public transport modes in thecapital city region of Korea.
This paper reviews the rationale behind the public transport reform by examining
earlier quantitative impact studies of the effectiveness of policy instruments. The
empirical study is based on stated preference methodology which analyses the impacts ofhypothetical policy measures. The public transport reform is then discussed in detail andan ex ante evaluation made of the policy reform.
The results of this study could be transferable to other cities with similar
characteristics. The policy recommendations could also be transferable in cases wheresuch cities exhibit similar socio-economic and infrastructure-related conditions.

Sungwon Lee — Discussion Paper 2013-17 — © OECD/ITF 2013

7

VALUING CONVENIENCE IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN THE KOREAN CONTEXT

2. RATIONALE BEHIND PUBLIC TRANSPORT POLICY REFORM IN KOREA

In countries like Korea, characterised by a high population density and advanced
urbanisation, public transport services such as subway and buses offer great potential forsaving energy and for mitigating various social costs associated with privatetransportation. In order to promote public transport, policy measures aimed at increasing
the attractiveness of public transport are required. Such policy measures include
increasing both the convenience level of public transport, by reducing travel and waitingtimes, and the amenity level by providing greater comfort.
Although the policy impact targets are known, there are still uncertainties about theeffectiveness of the policy. A quantitative policy impact analysis and econometric analysis
of demand elasticities are therefore required.
The quantitative policy impact analysis discussed here uses the stated preference
methodology for impact analysis of hypothetical transport policy measures. The outcomeof this analysis is then used as the basis for evidence-based transport policy intervention.
In addition, econometric analysis is performed to test the hypotheses of related transport
policies in order to compare the perceived cost to the real cost of transportation. The
table below summarises the findings of previous studies on the elasticities of demand forurban transportation.
Table 1. Price Elasticities of Demand for Urban Transportation

DemandAttributes

Fuel consumption
Car useCar ownership
Car ownership
Traffic
Demand for bus
Demand for subway
Demand for rail
Mass transit
Car ownership

Fuel price
Fuel price
Fuel priceCar price
Toll fee
Bus fareSubway fare
Railway fare
Fuel priceTransit fare

Short run
-0.27
-0.33
*
*
*
-0.30
-0.20
-0.70
*
*

Elasticities
Long run
-0.73
-0.30
*
*
*
-0.65
-0.40
-1.10
*
*

Overall
-0.48
-0.39
-0.21
-0.87
-0.45
-0.41
-0.20
-0.65
+0.34
+0.10

Note: Short run means usually within a year, and long run means 5 to 10 years.
Source: UK Department of Transport – full reference?

However, price and other elasticities of urban transport demand can vary from city tocity, depending on the city’s infrastructure conditions and the socio-economic conditionsof its residents. A separate city-wise elasticity analysis is therefore required for evidencebased policy making.

Sungwon Lee — Discussion Paper 2013-17 — © OECD/ITF 2013

9

VALUING CONVENIENCE IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN THE KOREAN CONTEXT

Lee et al (2003) analysed the hypothetical policy measures’ effectiveness in converting
private car users to public transport in the Seoul metropolitan area by using discrete
choice modelling based on stated preference methodology (SP).
A survey was conducted of 662 car users and produced 4,228 effective data points. The
main purposes of passenger car use were for commuting (71.5%) and business trips(16.4%). The following formulas represent the utility function of cars and alternativemodes (buses and subways):

Uoricar     1  Fuel   3  Ivt   5  Park

Ualtmode   2  Fare   3  Ivt   4  Ovt   6  Crowd
where altmode = bus, subway, bus+subway(oricar: original mode of passenger car, altmode: alternative mode, bus: bus, sub:subway, bus+subway: dual use of bus and subway, Fuel: fuel price, Fare: fare of bus or
subway, Ivt: in-vehicle time, Ovt: out-vehicle time, i.e., interval accessing bus andaccess time in the subway, Park: parking fee, Crowd: crowdedness, i.e., comfortablenessas a service measure)
The table below represents the estimation results for the mode choice behaviour of car
users. Although most variables were statistically significant, the fare for mass transit was
statistically insignificant. This is because car users do not consider fare level to besignificant as the fare is significantly lower than the cost of car use. Moreover, car users
are more responsive to changes in bus fares than to changes in subway fares. The higher
coefficient for out-vehicle time compared to that for in-vehicle time means that thedisutility of waiting is greater than that of riding. Bus users are more sensitive to invehicle time than other modes and this suggests that an increase in express bus supply
or HOV lanes can be effective in attracting bus users from cars. The estimated coefficientfor parking fees is more than twice as high as that for fuel prices. This is because theperceived cost of parking is much greater than that of fuel, and car users are very
sensitive to parking fees. The positive and higher coefficient for crowdedness in busescompared to the subway implies that car users are very sensitive to crowded buses.
Table 2. Estimation Results of Mode Choice Behavior of Car Users

Variables
Car dummy
Fuel price
Fare of bus or subway
In-vehicle time
Out-vehicle time
Parking fee
Crowdedness
2 (Rho square)
No. of responses

10

car  bus
coefficient t-value
1.63625.505-1.01E-04 -3.067-2.00E-04 -1.456-4.21E-02 -8.106-4.41E-02 -3.486-3.63E-04-6.36
0.83081
8.38
0.19
943

car  bus+subway
coefficientt-value
0.99752
5.207-1.17E-04-5.241-1.41E-04-2.862-2.76E-02-9.376-2.81E-02-5.053-2.49E-04-6.1880.64431
9.306
0.20
1,783

car  subway
coefficient t-value
0.50605
2.29-6.10E-05-2.848-5.40E-05-0.637-3.80E-02 -10.717-6.49E-02-7.089-2.61E-04-6.0180.58023
7.508
0.22
1,502

Sungwon Lee — Discussion Paper 2013-17 — © OECD/ITF 2013

VALUING CONVENIENCE IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN THE KOREAN CONTEXT

Price elasticities can be estimated through the sample enumeration method. This method
obtains arc elasticity rather than point elasticity if the underlying utility function isproperly specified. However, our model does not have components which allow varying
elasticity due to estimation-related constraints. Theoretically, arc elasticity offers a moreaccurate response estimation when the hypothetical attribute level changes are large. As
shown in the table below, the fuel price elasticity of demand for passenger car use
ranges between -0.078~-0.171, which shows an inelastic behaviour. With a 50%
increase in fuel price, a modal shift from car to bus or subway is expected at 3.9%
minimum and 8.5% maximum. Additionally, dual users of bus and subway show a higher
price elasticity than single users. This is because dual users are more sensitive to fuelprice as they are relatively longer-distance commuters. Overall, the estimated transportdemand elasticities in Korea are generally smaller than the U.K. elasticity cases shown in
Table 1, reflecting differences in socio-economic and infrastructure-related conditions.
Table 3. Fuel Price Elasticities of Demand for Car Use and Change of Modal Share

Fuel Price
Elasticities
10% price increase
20% ”
Car-bus
30% ”
40% ”
50% ”
10% ”
20% ”
Car-subway 30% ”
40% ”
50% ”
10% ”
20% ”
Car-bus+subway 30% ”
40% ”
50% ”

-0.086-0.086-0.086-0.086-0.086-0.078-0.078-0.078-0.078-0.078-0.171-0.171-0.171-0.171-0.169Change of Modal Share from car
to transit modes (%)
0.86
1.72
2.59
3.45
4.32
0.78
1.55
2.33
3.11
3.88
1.71
3.41
5.11
6.79
8.47

In Table 4, the cross-price elasticities of demand for passenger car use are estimatedthrough the sample enumeration technique. The fare cross-price elasticity ranges
between 0.016~0.084, which shows an inelastic behaviour. Also, a modal shift from car
to mass transit with a 50% fare decrease result in at most 4.35%. From this, we can
expect that implementing policy for subsidising transit fares will not bring about asignificant reduction in car usage.

Sungwon Lee — Discussion Paper 2013-17 — © OECD/ITF 2013

11

VALUING CONVENIENCE IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN THE KOREAN CONTEXT

Table 4. Fare Elasticities of Demand for Car Use and Change of Modal Share

10% fare decrease
20% ”
Car-bus
30% ”
40% ”
50% ”
10% ”
20% ”
Car-subway 30% ”
40% ”
50% ”
10% ”
20% ”
Car-bus+subway 30% ”
40% ”
50% ”

Fare (cross price)elasticity
0.058
0.058
0.058
0.058
0.058
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.016
0.086
0.086
0.087
0.087
0.087

Change of Modal Share from car
to transit modes (%)
0.58
1.16
1.75
2.33
2.92
0.16
0.33
0.49
0.66
0.82
0.86
1.73
2.60
3.47
4.35

Table 5 shows the change in modal share due to an increase in the parking fee. When themonthly parking fee increases by US $33.00, car use decreases by 13~15%. Similarly,
when the monthly parking fee increases by US $66.00, car use decreases by 25~30%.
Because current individual levels of parking fee are not all the same, the cross-priceelasticity of parking fees cannot be estimated.
Table 5. Change of Modal Share due to Increasing Parking Fee

Car-bus+40,000 won
per month

Car-subway
Carbus+subway
Car-bus+80,000 won
per month

Car-subway
Carbus+subway

Modal share before and after Change of modal
the change of parking fee
share (%)
Car
0.660  0.562-15Bus
0.340  0.438
29Car
0.576  0.502-13Subway0.424  0.498
18Car
0.567  0.495-13Bus+subway
0.433  0.505
17Car
0.660  0.460-30Bus0.340  0.540
59Car
0.576  0.428-26
Subway0.424  0.572
35Car
0.567  0.423-25Bus+subway
0.433  0.577
33

The cross-elasticity of the in-vehicle transit time for car use demand can be estimatedusing the sample enumeration technique. When the in-vehicle transit time is decreasedby 10~50%, the cross-elasticity ranges between 0.46~0.57. Moreover, when subway
speed improves by 50%, 29% of car users will transfer to the subway. Introducing either
an express subway transit system or an express bus service will therefore be an effective
policy for reducing car use and traffic congestion in Seoul if there is not much latent

12

Sungwon Lee — Discussion Paper 2013-17 — © OECD/ITF 2013

VALUING CONVENIENCE IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN THE KOREAN CONTEXT

demand for car use. The result of the cross-elasticity in-vehicle transit time for car use
demand is shown in Table 6. The subtle differences in elasticities in Tables 6 and 7 reflect
sample enumeration related errors.
Table 6. In-vehicle Time Elasticities of Demand for Car Use and Modal Share

Car-bus

Car-subway

Car-bus+subway

10% decrease
20% ”
30% ”
40% ”
50% ”
10% ”
20% ”
30% ”
40% ”
50% ”
10% ”
20% ”
30% ”
40% ”
50% ”

In-vehicle (cross) time
Change of modal share fromelasticity of demand forcar to transit modes (%)
car use
0.459
4.59
0.471
9.42
0.481
14.43
0.489
19.57
0.495
24.77
0.549
5.49
0.559
11.18
0.567
17.01
0.572
22.89
0.575
28.73
0.512
5.12
0.517
10.35
0.520
15.61
0.521
20.84
0.520
25.99

The cross-elasticity of out-vehicle transit time for demand of car use can be estimatedusing the sample enumeration technique. The cross-elasticity of out-vehicle time is lower
than that of the in-vehicle time. As shown in Table 7, when the out-vehicle transit timedecreases by 10~50%, the cross-elasticity ranges between 0.19~0.38 and the modal
shift from car to transit modes can change by up to 19%. If a policy aimed at increasing
the frequency of bus and subway services were to be implemented, it would be very
effective in promoting the use of transit modes and reducing traffic congestions in Korea.
Table 7. Out of-vehicle Time Elasticities of Demand for Car Use and Modal Share

Car-bus

Car-subway

10% decrease
20% ”
30% ”
40% ”
50% ”
10% ”
20% ”
30% ”
40% ”
50% ”

Out-vehicle (cross) timeelasticity of demand for
car use
0.197
0.200
0.202
0.204
0.206
0.364
0.369
0.373
0.377
0.380

Sungwon Lee — Discussion Paper 2013-17 — © OECD/ITF 2013

Change of modal share fromcar to transit modes (%)
1.97
3.99
6.05
8.15
10.28
3.64
7.38
11.20
15.08
18.99

13

VALUING CONVENIENCE IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN THE KOREAN CONTEXT

Car-bus+subway

10% ”
20% ”
30% ”
40% ”
50% ”

0.208
0.210
0.211
0.212
0.213

2.08
4.19
6.33
8.48
10.65

In this study, the level of service in transit modes is defined as the level of crowdedness.
As shown in Table 8, when the congestion of transit modes decreases by one step,
defined as the possibility of securing a seat in crowded public transit, 18~25% of car
users will transfer to alternative modes. Moreover, improving in-vehicle congestion isvery important for promoting the use of transit modes and reducing traffic congestion in
Seoul.
Table 8. Car Users’ Response to Service Variable of In-vehicle Congestion

Change of modal share
Car-bus
Car-subway
Car-bus+subway

Improving one step
Worsening one step
Improving one step
Worsening one step
Improving one step
Worsening one step

25.05 % from car to bus
21.92 % from bus to car
17.85 % from car to subway
17.47 % from subway to car
20.71 % from car to bus+subway
20.46 % from bus+subway to car

By utilising elasticity estimates, we were able to analyse the effects of hypothetical TDM
policies in terms of modal shifts. As a result, we determined that fuel price policy andfare-related policy had very limited impacts and were very ineffective policy measures.
On the other hand, there were many effective policy measures such as parking
regulations, pricing policies related to parking, express buses, express urban trains andHOV lanes. In addition, reducing crowdedness in bus and subway by increasing thefrequency of public transit services is also an effective policy measure.
The results of the empirical analysis given above suggest which policy intervention
measures would be effective in revitalising public transport use in the Seoul metropolitan
region. These include providing faster and more frequent services and increasing theamenity level of public transport. The following sections describe how these policy
measures have been implemented in Seoul.

14

Sungwon Lee — Discussion Paper 2013-17 — © OECD/ITF 2013

VALUING CONVENIENCE IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN THE KOREAN CONTEXT

3. SEOUL’S PUBLIC TRANSPORT SYSTEM

Seoul is the capital of South Korea with a population of approximately 10 million
inhabitants living in an area of 605.2 km2 and with a GRDP (Gross Regional Domestic
Product) of 283,651 billion won (based on 2011 figures). Although the Seoul area
accounts for merely 0.6% of South Korea’s total surface area, it contains 20.1% of
Korea’s entire population. The SMA (Seoul Metropolitan Area) includes Seoul, Incheon
and Gyeonggi and has a population of 26.6 million (49.3%), covering an area of 11,818
km2, and has GRDP of 585,979 billion won (based on 2011 figures).
A study was conducted to observe the urban sprawl of the SMA over two periods of time.
Between 1989 and 1996, 5 towns and 292, 000 houses were built in an area of 50.1
km2, accommodating a population of 1.17 million. Between 2001 and 2012, a further 12
towns and 671,000 houses were built in an area of 146.1 km2, accommodating a
population of 1.75 million. Although the periods were of differing durations, the rate ofurbanisation was higher in the second period than in the first.
Figure 1. Trends in Urbanisation in the Seoul Metropolitan Area

1985

Sungwon Lee — Discussion Paper 2013-17 — © OECD/ITF 2013

2003

15

VALUING CONVENIENCE IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN THE KOREAN CONTEXT

Figure 2. Trends of Vehicle Registration

The above figure illustrates the number of vehicles registered in Seoul, the SMA, and theRepublic of Korea for specific years. As a city develops and becomes increasingly
urbanised, more people will be attracted to move there to experience a higher standardof living compared to rural areas. This trend is also closely linked to the increase in thenumber of new vehicle registrations. In 2011, for example, the number of vehicles
registered per person in Seoul increased from 0.02 in 1980 to 0.3.
The SMA has some of the most highly developed transport infrastructure in Korea. The
SMA has some 24,070 km of road, 3,694 bus routes (26,847 vehicles), and 825.2 km of
railway lines (521 stations). Although Seoul takes up a small proportion of land area in
the SMA, its transport infrastructure comprises about 8,199 km of road, 447 bus lines(9,340 vehicles), and 346.3 km of railway lines (321 stations).
Figure 3. Mode Share for Each SMA Region

16

Sungwon Lee — Discussion Paper 2013-17 — © OECD/ITF 2013

VALUING CONVENIENCE IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN THE KOREAN CONTEXTThe Seoul Metropolitan Transportation Authority has conducted a study to determine
transport conditions in the major regions in the SMA. Seoul accounts for approximately
20.011 million of the 49.660 million intra-city trips per day in the SMA. As shown in the
figure above, the majority of people in Seoul make use of the well-developed public
transportation network. The congested traffic conditions in Seoul make subways andbuses the most viable options. In contrast, a higher proportion of people in Incheon and
Gyeonggi use private cars.

4. SEOUL PUBLIC TRANSPORT REFORM ACHIEVEMENTS

The reform of Seoul’s public transport system had two main objectives: firstly, toincrease the speed and punctuality of bus services, and secondly to integrate all modesof public transport. The speed of bus services was increased by installing exclusive
median bus lanes. The integration of public transport services called for the semi-public
provision of bus services and introduction of an integrated public transport fare whichallows strictly distance based fares regardless of the number of transfers involved. These
policy measures were generally in line with the policy implications derived from ourquantitative studies of policy instrument effectiveness.
Infrastructure Development
Although Seoul’s transport infrastructure is relatively advanced compared to other
cities in Korea, several development projects can help to improve the quality of transport
services and infrastructure. First, the upgrading of existing railway lines in Gyeonggi-do,
Incheon, and Gangwon-do not only relieves congestion in Seoul, but also helps the
spread of Seoul’s population. As the concentration of people and economic activities has
increased in the Seoul Metropolitan Area, dispersion and balanced regional growth havebeen major policy objectives in Korea. Furthermore, expanding the capacity andelectrification of train services allows more efficient operations. Last, constructing newlines in Ansan, Gwacheon, Ilsan, Bundang, and Pangyo helps to support new town
development. The lines connected to Seoul can also help improve traffic conditions. Newlines are financed by levying development charges.
Semi-Public Bus Operation and Integrated Fares
The need to reform public transport services was clear from the vicious circle in which
bus services found themselves. The increasing number of vehicles on the roads and lackof bus priority policies, such as bus lanes and subsidies, were responsible for the poor
punctuality, lack of reliability and slow speed of bus services. The resultant operating
conditions and congestion generated stress in bus drivers, which could lead to unfriendly
services and traffic accidents. Moreover, limited road capacity and congestion also
resulted in routes being abandoned, periodic increases in fare and labour disputes. Sinceroutes were owned by private bus companies, it was difficult to adjust routes to demand.
As a result of reduced operations and increased fares, the number of bus users had
decreased, resulting in cuts in bus services, reductions in staff levels and the bankruptcy
of bus companies.

Sungwon Lee — Discussion Paper 2013-17 — © OECD/ITF 201317

VALUING CONVENIENCE IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN THE KOREAN CONTEXTIn order to address the above issues, the Seoul Metropolitan Government proposed
and implemented the following reforms of the transport system.
A new revenue system and main routes bidding system were introduced for bus
services. While the previous revenue system was based on the number of passengers,
this new system is based on the distance covered by services (veh-km). Furthermore,these revenues are jointly managed.
The new bus network lines are colour-coded according to the type of service they aredesigned to provide. Blue lines are trunk lines linking suburbs to the downtown area at
the regional level. Trunk lines also provide fast and punctual services. Green lines arefeeder lines feeding into trunk lines and the subway network in order to meet local traffic
demands. Yellow lines are circular lines providing local services within the downtown
area. The circular lines are mainly designed for business and shopping trips. Lastly, redlines provide services at the level of the metropolitan area as a whole by providing
express connections between satellite cities and the downtown area. Metropolitan arealines also help to provide alternative transport for passenger car commuters. The
following two figures illustrate the situation before and after creation of the new
networks.
Figure 4. Trunk & Feeder Bus System

Figure 5. New Trunk & Feeder Network

18

Sungwon Lee — Discussion Paper 2013-17 — © OECD/ITF 2013

VALUING CONVENIENCE IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN THE KOREAN CONTEXT

Seoul has introduced distance-based fares for its public transport transits. For single
subway trips, a basic fare of 1,000 Korean won (1 US Dollar) is charged for trips of up to
12 km and an extra fare of 100 Korean won added for every additional 6 km. In the caseof single bus trips, users pay a single fare of 1,000 Korean won. For trips involving
transfers, Korea’s public transit system utilises a cumulative distance-based fare system.
Transferring between subway lines is free of charge. A basic fare goes up to 10 km andan extra fare is paid for every additional 5 km.
Bus Management/Information System
Figure 6. Bus Information Service

Seoul TOPIS (Transport Operation & Information Service) provides real-time
information on bus operations through the ARS, the Internet, mobile applications and bus
shelters. Bus information, such as real-time location, the interval between buses, arrival
times, routes and transfers, can be easily accessed by both passengers and bus
companies. Bus companies use this information to manage bus services efficiently.
Infrastructure: Exclusive bus lane, Station Improvement
Exclusive bus lanes allow faster and more reliable bus services to be provided within
the SMA’s service area. In 2011, there were 157 km of bus lanes installed along 13
corridors. Furthermore, the introduction of exclusive median bus lanes also helped to
improve the efficiency of bus operation. As a result, it has attracted patronage fromprivate vehicles and increased the number of bus users.

Sungwon Lee — Discussion Paper 2013-17 — © OECD/ITF 2013

19

VALUING CONVENIENCE IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN THE KOREAN CONTEXT

Figure 7. Exclusive Median Bus Lane

Figure 8. Bus Stop Improvement

As shown in the figure above, bus stops have been drastically improved. Shelters andfences have been installed to provide bus users with a suitable area in which to wait. In
addition, some bus stops display real-time bus information so that users know exactly
when the next bus is coming.

20

Sungwon Lee — Discussion Paper 2013-17 — © OECD/ITF 2013

VALUING CONVENIENCE IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN THE KOREAN CONTEXT

5. SUMMARY AND RESULTS OF THE REFORM OF PUBLIC TRANSPORT SERVICES

Empirical studies of public transport in Korea suggest that improving theattractiveness of services by reducing travel times and improving amenities can strongly
increase public transport patronage. Travel time related attributes are estimated to be
more important than monetary attributes in the Seoul metropolitan region. As people areaccustomed to high amenity levels in private transport they tend to require moreamenities in public transport services. Empirical evidence of this thesis in Korea can befound in Lee et al (2003).
Figure 9. Increase in Public Transport Patronage

Sungwon Lee — Discussion Paper 2013-17 — © OECD/ITF 201321

VALUING CONVENIENCE IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN THE KOREAN CONTEXT

Figure 10. Trend in Citizens’ Satisfaction with Transit Services

The reform of public transport in Seoul can be regarded as a success. The reform waswell received by citizens and was also benchmarked in many other cities in Korea as wellas in other countries.
Bus ridership actually increased by about 14% after the reform, reversing the earlier
trend decline. According to an official survey, public satisfaction with the Seoul public
transport system also jumped by 16% after the reform. Bus users rated increased
punctuality and shortened travel times as highly effective factors in encouraging people
to switch to public transport. The introduction of distance-based integrated fares wasanother important element of the reform, as it also enhances the attractiveness of public
transport.
The results of public transport policy reform are consistent with ex ante empiricalanalysis outcomes. These suggest that empirical studies can play a practical role inpredicting hypothetical policy measures effectiveness with a reasonable degree of
accuracy.

22

Sungwon Lee — Discussion Paper 2013-17 — © OECD/ITF 2013

VALUING CONVENIENCE IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN THE KOREAN CONTEXTREFERENCES

Lee, Sungwon and Jee Hyung Park (1998), Analysis on the Effects of Fare Policies ofRegional Transportation, Korea Transport Institute.
Lee, Sungwon, Yeong Heok Lee, and Jee Hyung Park(2000), Estimating Price Elasticities
of Demand for Air Transportation with Stated Preference Technique, Journal of
Korea Transportation Research Society, 18(1).
Lee, Sungwon, Yeong Heok Lee, and Jee Hyung Park (2003) , Estimating Price andService Elasticity of Urban Transportation Demand with Stated Preference
Technique: A Case in Korea, Transportation Research Record 1839.
Lee, Sungwon, Sangyong Han, and Sooshin Park (2005), A Quantitative Analysis ofCommuting Cost Subsidy Program, Korea Transport Institute
U.K. Department of Transport (1994), Transport Elasticity Study, HMSO.
U.K. Department of Transport (1996), Transport the Way Forward, HMSO.
Goodwin, P. B. (1992), A Review of New Demand Elasticities with Special Reference to
Short and Long Run Effects of Price Changes. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy,
24(2)Kocur, George, T. Adler, W. Hyman, B. Aunet (1982), Guide to Forecasting Travel
Demand with Direct Utility Assessment. U. S. Department of Transportation.
Steer Davies Gleave (1996), Countrylink Fares Elasticity Study.
Park, Jin Young (2013), Public Bus Service Modernization, Internal KOTI Mimeo.
Seoul Metropolitan Government (2010), 2010 Seoul Survey.

Sungwon Lee — Discussion Paper 2013-17 — © OECD/ITF 201323

International Transport Forum
2 rue André Pascal
75775 Paris Cedex 16
itf.contact@oecd.org
www.internationaltransportforum.org