<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim">
 <record>
  <leader>     caa a22        4500</leader>
  <controlfield tag="001">445890770</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="003">CHVBK</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="005">20180317145615.0</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="007">cr unu---uuuuu</controlfield>
  <controlfield tag="008">170323e20110301xx      s     000 0 eng  </controlfield>
  <datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="a">10.1007/s11116-010-9305-x</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">doi</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">(NATIONALLICENCE)springer-10.1007/s11116-010-9305-x</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="245" ind1="0" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="a">Light rail routing: do goals matter?</subfield>
   <subfield code="h">[Elektronische Daten]</subfield>
   <subfield code="c">[Galit Cohen-Blankshtain, Eran Feitelson]</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="520" ind1="3" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Decisions to fund light rail (LRT) have been critiqued as instrumentally irrational. This paper examines whether the seemingly more technical LRT routing decisions are instrumentally rational. To this end, we test whether routing decisions are made to address goals that are rationally derived from the challenges faced by the urban region. On the basis of a review of the literature, two rationales that underlie most of the stated goals are identified: providing service for the most heavily travelled and congested corridors and inducing development, and subsequently demand, in areas perceived to be underdeveloped or distressed and in areas that have deteriorated. In a survey of key respondents from 16 cities, we find that goals are only weakly correlated with the challenges. While most routes provide service on the most heavily demanded corridors, routing decisions are no less driven by a desire to cut pecuniary and transaction costs. For this reason existing rights of way are often preferred. This is explained by the intertwining of routing and funding decisions. The implications of these findings for evaluation techniques of LRT routes are discussed.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="540" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Springer Science+Business Media, LLC., 2010</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Light rail</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="690" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Rational decision making</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Cohen-Blankshtain</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">Galit</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">Department of Geography and School of Public Policy, The Hebrew University, Mount Scopus, 91509, Jerusalem, Israel</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">Feitelson</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">Eran</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">Department of Geography, The Hebrew University, Mount Scopus, 91509, Jerusalem, Israel</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="t">Transportation</subfield>
   <subfield code="d">Springer US; http://www.springer-ny.com</subfield>
   <subfield code="g">38/2(2011-03-01), 343-361</subfield>
   <subfield code="x">0049-4488</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">38:2&lt;343</subfield>
   <subfield code="1">2011</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">38</subfield>
   <subfield code="o">11116</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0">
   <subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-010-9305-x</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">text/html</subfield>
   <subfield code="z">Onlinezugriff via DOI</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="908" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="D">1</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">research-article</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">jats</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">856</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">40</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-010-9305-x</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">text/html</subfield>
   <subfield code="z">Onlinezugriff via DOI</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">700</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">1-</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">Cohen-Blankshtain</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">Galit</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">Department of Geography and School of Public Policy, The Hebrew University, Mount Scopus, 91509, Jerusalem, Israel</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">700</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">1-</subfield>
   <subfield code="a">Feitelson</subfield>
   <subfield code="D">Eran</subfield>
   <subfield code="u">Department of Geography, The Hebrew University, Mount Scopus, 91509, Jerusalem, Israel</subfield>
   <subfield code="4">aut</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="P">773</subfield>
   <subfield code="E">0-</subfield>
   <subfield code="t">Transportation</subfield>
   <subfield code="d">Springer US; http://www.springer-ny.com</subfield>
   <subfield code="g">38/2(2011-03-01), 343-361</subfield>
   <subfield code="x">0049-4488</subfield>
   <subfield code="q">38:2&lt;343</subfield>
   <subfield code="1">2011</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">38</subfield>
   <subfield code="o">11116</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="900" ind1=" " ind2="7">
   <subfield code="a">Metadata rights reserved</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">Springer special CC-BY-NC licence</subfield>
   <subfield code="2">nationallicence</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="898" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="a">BK010053</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">XK010053</subfield>
   <subfield code="c">XK010000</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="949" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
   <subfield code="B">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="F">NATIONALLICENCE</subfield>
   <subfield code="b">NL-springer</subfield>
  </datafield>
 </record>
</collection>
