Cover Image

Not for Sale



View/Hide Left Panel
Click for next page ( 76


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 75
75 Part II offenses ment can be used in many different settings. It is also interesting b Fare evasion (citations) to observe what measures and processes were similar to those b Other assaults (arrests) found in the United States. b Trespassing (arrests) Rystam and Renolen [2.3.16] developed a guidebook for b Vandalism (arrests) evaluating measures in public transit systems based on experi- Other security issues ences from the evaluations of several public transit projects in b Bomb threats Norway and Sweden. The guidelines may be used by planners, b Nonviolent civil disturbances [2.3.13] consultants, and municipalities. The guideline is a general document so that it can be used as a basis when evaluating Some of these safety and security incidents that one would minor as well as major public transit systems. see in an urban transit system, or even in an urban APM sys- Another international example of transit performance mea- tem, might be different from what is seen in an airport APM sures came from Thailand [2.3.17]. This study dem onstrated system. Because of this, these data should be studied further that the performance indicator analysis technique can be to determine their applicability to airport APM systems and used as a diagnostic tool to identify operational in efficiency how they might best be developed into effective performance and ineffectiveness at the route level of transit operation. measures. Applying the technique to 14 bus routes of the Bangkok Mass Transit Authority, the research revealed the inter-route differ- ences in operational efficiency and effectiveness. The authors 2.3.3 International Practices selected 20 performance indicators related to costs of services, In order to identify the use of performance measures in fuel consumption, staff ratio, crew productivity, fleet utiliza- different institutional and cultural contexts, Meyer [2.3.11] tion, service output per bus, daily revenues, and so forth to examined the use of performance measures in three coun- represent the resource efficiency, resource effectiveness, and tries: Australia, Japan, and New Zealand. This work repre- service effectiveness of the bus system. Results of the analyses sented an international review on performance measures and revealed that considerable variations existed across the routes was sponsored by the FHWA and AASHTO. After discussing against many of these 20 selected indicators. the organizational context for the use of performance mea- Light rail transit (LRT) is the focus of another international sures, identifying key performance measures, and making application of transit performance measures [2.3.10], which observations on aspects of the performance-based planning may have direct implications for developing airport APM approach used, the author highlighted performance mea- performance measures due to the common characteristics sures related to safety, congestion, and freight movement. of the modes. Conducted by the Urban Transport Group The paper noted the following common characteristics of of the European Conference of Ministers of Transport, this each case: study was based on case studies and national overviews pro- vided by the six participating countries: France, Germany, The use of a common framework for performance the Netherlands, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the measurement; United States. The research traced the development of LRT; The importance of collaboration among different agencies reviewed policy, managerial, and technological trends; and for performance categories that transcend one policy area; analyzed comparative cost-effectiveness. The standardized The use of performance measures at different levels of framework developed for the project allowed consistent planning and decision making; comparisons of the international systems. The vertical integration of information flow in agencies; The distinction between outcomes and outputs, the 2.4Airline Performance importance of data-collection capability, and the use of Measurement information technologies; The importance of performance measurement as a means This section is a summary of the key findings of performance of providing greater accountability and visibility to the measurement as it relates to the airline industry. Four airline public; and performance measurement areas are discussed in this section: The need for top management leadership and commitment. government-monitored measures, airport operator/airline measures, other airport agency measures, and measures result- The Meyer publication brought home performance mea- ing from design recommendations, standards, and levels of surement experience taking place in three different institutional service. and cultural contexts. The common characteristics of each Performance measures in the airline industry generally take provide an important understanding of how such measure- two forms: financial and nonfinancial. Financial performance