In recent years, an increasing number of U.S. transit agencies have been implementing smart card technology for fare collection. Smart cards have the potential to improve transit operations through new options for innovative fare policies, convenience and speed in fare payment, and improved ridership data collection. In addition, when smart cards are adopted in interoperable systems across multiple agencies, transit riders may use one fare card across many operators. Despite these advantages, smart card adoption among U.S. transit agencies has been haltingly slow, and joint decision-making for interoperable systems has been difficult.;What institutional and organizational factors are associated with smart card adoption in transit agencies? Do early adopters differ from late adopters? What conditions facilitate collaborations for interoperable systems, and why have these efforts been so difficult? This study uses survey and interview data to analyze differences between agencies that (1) have adopted interoperable systems, (2) have adopted stand-alone systems, (3) are currently evaluating smart cards, (4) have considered but rejected the technology, and (5) have never considered the use of smart cards.;I find that agencies adopting interoperable systems are motivated by the availability of regional funds for needed fare box replacements, or by a regional mandate to participate. In general, efforts are not focused on the collection of data for service coordination or for unifying fare policies between multiple operators; instead, they aim to deliver seamless, convenient fare payment options for rider convenience. Agencies with stand-alone systems, however, are more likely to have differentiated fare structures, view data collection as important, and prioritize fare fraud as an agency concern---suggesting that operations and data collection are principal motives. In all cases, the availability of external funding is a significant factor in smart card adoption.;Additionally, the formation of interoperable partnerships has been particularly difficult due to institutional and historical issues such as a lack of precedence in revenue- and cost-sharing between transit operators, historic distrust between agencies, the parochial nature of fare collection, and unclear lines of authority and accountability in leading collaborative efforts. Additionally, the formation of partnerships both reduces and introduces risk to individual operators---further complicating joint decision-making.
展开▼
