Public–private partnerships in transportation policy: the case of advanced traveler information systems

International Journal of Public Administration

Volumn 28, Issue 13-14, 2005, Pages 1117-1134

  Lawther, Wendell C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

Advanced traveler information systems; Public private partnerships

Indexed keywords

EID: 85045156975     PISSN: 01900692     EISSN: 15324265     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01900690500290660     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Francois, F.B., 2001. “ Introduction ”. In Intelligent Transportation Primer, Edited by: Nelson, Donna C., 1-1–1-15. Washington, DC: Institute of Transportation Engineers. 1–7
2. Zimmerman, C., 2000. “ Advanced Traveler Information Systems ”. In Intelligent Transportation Primer, Edited by: Nelson, Donna C., 5-1–5-15. Washington, DC: Institute of Transportation Engineers.
3. A growing number of metropolitan areas are using 511 to provide information that was previously provided via a seven-digit telephone number. 511 is presently limited to providing area-wide information, and its use is limited but growing nationwide http://www.deploy511.org/index.htm
4. Jensen, M., Cluett, C., Wunderlich, K., DeBlasio, A., and Sanchez, R., 2000. Metropolitan Model Deployment Initiative Seattle Evaluation Report Final Draft, Washington, DC: United States Department of Transportation. FHWA-OP-00-020
5. Schuman, R., and Sherer, E., 2001. ATIS U.S. Business Models Review, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Transportation and ITS Joint Program Office: Washington DC.
6. National Highway Institute. 1999. Intelligent Transportation Systems Public-Private Partnerships—Participant Workbook Washington, DC
7. st Century: A Partnership Model. The PricewaterhouseCoopers Endowment for the Business of Government: Arlington, VA, 2002
8. 10. See, for example, the discussion in Hodge, G.A. Privatization: An International Review of Performance. Westview Press: Boulder, CO, 2000
9. Florida Department of Transportation. 1999. Operations, Management and Maintenance Issues Paper Tallahassee, FL
10. Van Slyke, D.M., 2003. The Mythology of Privatization in Contracting for Social Services. Public Administration Review, 63 (3): 296–315.
11. 13. Interview with Karen Cavallo Miller, Project Manager, Partners in Motion (Washington DC area ATIS), held April 5, 2001
12. 15. For the purposes of this study, arterial roadways are those present in metropolitan areas that are not classified as freeways or expressways
13. Hamad, A-R.The Future of Arterial Traffic Management. ITS 2013 Vision of the Future of ITS, Vision Paper 3, 2003 http://www.pbsj.com/its2013/pdfdocs/atrerial_traffic.pdf
14. Hallenbeck, M., 1998. Choosing the Route To Traveler Information Systems Deployment: Decision Factors for Creating Public/Private Business Plans, Washington, DC: ITS America.
15. McQueen, B., Schuman, R., and Chen, K., 2002. Advanced Traveler Information Systems, Norwood, MA: Artech House, Inc.
16. See the ITS Metropolitan Tracking Program results www.itsdeployment2.ed.ornl.gov/its2000
17. 21. Mitchell, D.J. Their Brother's Keeper. ITS World2000 (May/June): 10–11
18. Newsletter of the ITS Cooperative Deployment Network http://www.nawgits.com/icdn/travinfo_ii.html
19. Amodei, R., Bard, E., Brong, B., Cahoon, F., Jasper, K., Manchester, K., Robey, N., Schnenk, D., Stearman, B., and Subrahmaniam, S., 1998; FHWA-RD-98-099. Atlanta Navigator Case Study, Washington, DC: United States Department of Transportation.
20. Schrank, D., and Lomax, T., 1999. The 1999 Urban Mobility Report: Information for Urban America, College Station, TX: The Texas Transportation Institute, Texas A&M University.
21. Bradshaw, C., Hallenbeck, M., and McIntosh, D., 1999. Washington State Department of Transportation Advanced Transportation Systems Business Plan, Seattle, WA: Washington State Transportation Center, University of Washington.
22. AZTech. 1998. Draft AZTech Implementation Plan Per FHWA Guidance 23 CFR 655.409 Phoenix, AZ
23. Wetherby, B., 1998. Seattle Area-Wide Information for Travelers Institutional Issues Study, McClean, VA: Science Applications International Corporation.
24. Miller, M., 1998. Testing a Proposed Decision Oriented Framework To Understand ITS Deployment Issues: A Case Study of the TravInfo ATIS Project, Berkeley, CA: California Path Research. UCB-ITS-PRR-98-35
25. Werner, J. TravInfo II Heads Towards Deployment: A Discussion with Emily Van Wagner and Michael Berman. Newsletter of the ITS Cooperative Deployment Network, 2001 http://www.nawgits.com/icdn/travinfo_ii.html
26. Lawther, W., and Berman, E., 2002. Annual Evaluation of the SmartRoute Systems Advanced Traveler Information Services Contract for Miami-Dade, Broward and Palm Beach Counties Orlando, FL
27. 32. Shavers, K. “Smart” Traffic System a Failure: Personal Notification System Lacked Data, Customers and Profits. The Washington Post, December 17, 2002; BO1
28. Glass, S., 1999. ARTIMIS Operational Requirements: A Compendium of Current Tasks Performed During the Operation of ATIMIS Cincinati, OH
29. 34. Evaluation attempts have focused on simulations of traffic flow and on traffic along limited miles of roadway for short specified timeframes, primarily in the context of evaluating freeway service patrols. See, for example: Latoski, S.P.; Pal, R.; Sinha, K.C. Cost Effectiveness Evaluation of Hoosier Helper Freeway Service Patrol. Journal of Transportation Engineering1999, 125 (5): 429–438; Maas, G.; Maggio, M.; Shafie, H.; Stough, R. Incident Management and Intelligent Transportation SystemsTechnology: Estimating Benefits for Northern Virginia. Detroit, MI: Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of ITS America, March, 1998; Skabardonis, A.; Noeimi, H.; Petty, K.; Rydzewski, D.; Varaiya, P.P.; Al-Deek, H. Freeway Service Patrol Evaluation. California PATH Program: Berkeley, CA, 1995; PRR-95–5
30. 35. In the South Florida ATIS, for example, the introduction of 511 has raised the monthly telephone calls from 15,000 per month to over 150,000 (for the month of November 2003). Approximately 4.7 million people live in the three-county South Florida region
31. 36. See, for example, Lappin, J. Advanced Traveler Information Systems: What Do ATIS Customers Want? United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, ITS Joint Program Office: Washington, DC, 2000
32. th annual meeting of the Transportation Research Board, January 2000
33. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 2000. OKI Evaluation of Intelligent Transportation System Cincinnati, OH