{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015789473684210527, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004605263157894736, 'mean_word_length': 5.417721518987341, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Parking versus public transport subsidies: case study of Nanjing, China

Promoting the use and development of public transit not only includes creating a transit-oriented built environment but also implementing an economic policy that incorporates transport subsidies; this policy must not be ignored because it could substantially affect travel behavior. Considering these subsidies and taking Nanjing as an example, this paper analyzes and compares the operating subsidies and disguised external cost subsidies for travel using both public transit and cars. The results show that the unit subsidy for cars is 11·8 times that for public transit and that the unit subsidy for cars just because of free parking is more than 15 times that for public transit because of governmental subsidy. This subsidy is extremely unfair and opposes the established transit-oriented development direction. Next, this paper, based on stated preference survey data, analyzes potential changes in travel modes under the condition that free parking is eliminated. The results show that more than 1/3 of customers would turn to public transit and slow-moving transport such as bicycles and walking. Finally, this paper makes policy suggestions such as eliminating the welfare of parking prices, setting a maximum index for affiliated parking facilities instead of a minimum index, subsidizing public transit, and increasing taxation based on car use to achieve performance objectives including social equity and transit-oriented development.