مشخصات مقاله | |
انتشار | مقاله سال 2018 |
تعداد صفحات مقاله انگلیسی | 19 صفحه |
هزینه | دانلود مقاله انگلیسی رایگان میباشد. |
منتشر شده در | نشریه اسپرینگر |
نوع نگارش مقاله | مقاله پژوهشی (Research article) |
مقاله بیس | این مقاله بیس میباشد |
نوع مقاله | ISI |
عنوان انگلیسی مقاله | Financing urban transportation infrastructure in a multi-actors environment: the role of value capture |
ترجمه عنوان مقاله | رویارویی با زیرساخت حمل و نقل شهری در محیط چند منظوره: نقش ارزش بدست آمده |
فرمت مقاله انگلیسی | |
رشته های مرتبط | مهندسی عمران |
گرایش های مرتبط | مهندسی راه و ترابری، برنامه ریزی حمل و نقل |
مجله | بررسی تحقیقات حمل و نقل اروپایی – European Transport Research Review |
دانشگاه | Department of Multi-Actor Systems – Faculty of Technology – Netherlands |
کلمات کلیدی | سرمایه جذب ارزش، برنامه ریزی زیربنایی حمل و نقل عمومی شهری، تحلیل چند معیار چند بازیگر |
کلمات کلیدی انگلیسی | Value capture finance, Urban public transport infrastructure planning, Multi-actor multi-criteria analysis |
شناسه دیجیتال – doi |
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12544-017-0281-5 |
کد محصول | E8696 |
وضعیت ترجمه مقاله | ترجمه آماده این مقاله موجود نمیباشد. میتوانید از طریق دکمه پایین سفارش دهید. |
دانلود رایگان مقاله | دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی |
سفارش ترجمه این مقاله | سفارش ترجمه این مقاله |
بخشی از متن مقاله: |
1 Introduction
Accessibility is a key factor in the attempt to shape an urban form that is environmentally sustainable, socially equitable and inclusive. Transportation investments characterize the urban tissue; the operation of a new public transport line increases accessibility levels and thus has an impact on locations, intensities, types of development and the value of land. Nowadays, public transport systems worldwide confront severe budgetary challenges due to their reliance on public financial resources, which are constantly shrinking as a result of the economic crisis. Financing transport infrastructure has been and still is a major decision criterion for the administration (local, national, federal or supranational). The ongoing debate started, by the end of WWII, in the United States where in the Highway Acts, it was mentioned that the Federal government undertakes highway financing only for intra state highways i.e. for transport infrastructure of nationwide interest (Highway Act 1956) [2]. In the ‘70s, the extension of NY subway failed to get federal support on the grounds that it did not benefit the nation but only New Yorkers. A number of Public Hearings took place, trying to establish the indirect impact to the nation of a city subway system, which is used not only by the locals but by visitors as well (social amenity attitude), but to no avail as far as decision makers were concerned. The underlying note to this debate was that as long as the taxpayer pays for transport infrastructure he/she should clearly benefit from it. In other words, transport infrastructure as a social amenity should be financed by those who directly benefit from it. The 80’s introduced another concept as far as transport in general is concerned. The Thatcher administration considered that transport is an enterprise and it should be viewed that way. It is common knowledge that privatization mania started in this decade, especially in the United Kingdom. Privatization introduced new financial schemes which were the offspring of common corporate practice together with a change of state philosophy. The 90’s in some and the start of the twenty-first century for all European states, are marked by alternate financial schemes; from concessions, to PPPs and finally to VCRs which address the issue of financing in a more flexible way, with the involvement of the private sector both in financing and management, burdening mainly those who benefit from transport infrastructure more than all taxpayers. Creative and novel ideas are therefore needed; a family of innovative financial mechanisms and tools for urban public transport, based on the value increment caused by enhanced accessibility, are lately gaining much popularity as a solution to the aforementioned fiscal challenges: Value Capture Finance (VCF) [3–6]. |