Skip navigation
  • Home
  • Browse
    • Communities
      & Collections
    • Browse Items by:
    • Publication Date
    • Author
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Department
  • Sign on to:
    • My MacSphere
    • Receive email
      updates
    • Edit Profile


McMaster University Home Page
  1. MacSphere
  2. Open Access Dissertations and Theses Community
  3. Open Access Dissertations and Theses
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11375/32519
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.advisorMohamed, Moataz-
dc.contributor.authorTasnim, Sadia-
dc.date.accessioned2025-10-15T19:48:48Z-
dc.date.available2025-10-15T19:48:48Z-
dc.date.issued2025-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11375/32519-
dc.description.abstractPublic transit agencies encounter difficulties in determining whether fixed-route transit (FRT) or demand-responsive transit (DRT) is better suited for different communities. Literature uses simulation models or different key performance indicators (KPIs) to compare transit service structures, which lacks consensus and clear thresholds. This gap limits transit planners to evaluate trade-offs between cost, accessibility, operational and environmental impact on performance when selecting the best service structure. An in-depth literature review explores the fragmented growth of benchmarking frameworks developed by transit industries and academic studies, depicting the lack of standardization that complicates cross-service evaluation. Key gaps in the literature include inconsistent KPI definitions, limited integration of user and provider perspectives as well the scarcity of real-world comparison evaluations. This thesis proposes an evaluation framework consisting of KPIs to assess FRT and DRT, examining performance through real-world operational data. The framework spans operational, environmental, social, and economic domains, and further integrate both the service provider’s and user’s perspectives to deliver a holistic evaluation. Standardizing definitions, units, and calculation methods enables the framework to address the lack of holistic comparability across transit service structures. The KPI evaluation framework is applied to a real-world case study, where the same area was served by FRT and DRT. The results highlight mixed messages on service performance. The chapter concludes with the thesis’s main contributions, limitations, and directions for future research. This thesis will advance the ability to evaluate, compare and design transit service structures.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.titleAn Evaluation Framework for Bus Transit Service Structures Using Dual-Perspective Indicatorsen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.contributor.departmentCivil Engineeringen_US
dc.description.degreetypeThesisen_US
dc.description.degreeMaster of Applied Science (MASc)en_US
dc.description.layabstractThis thesis develops an assessment framework to assess the performance of fixed-route transit (FRT) and demand-responsive transit (DRT). The framework spans operational, social, economic, and environmental categories, and considers service user and provider perspectives. The framework is based on a set of key performance indicators (KPIs) synthesized from literature. The framework is applied to a real-world case study, where the same area was served by FRT and DRT. The service evaluation returned mixed messages on the performance of the services and practical insights into when each service performs better. The results, from the case study, show that operational cost and greenhouse gas emissions per passenger-kilometre travelled (PKT) in FRT are 80% lower than DRT indicating that FRT could move more passengers per kilometre at lower cost and emissions compared to DRT. Overall, the proposed framework offers a practical solution for transit planners and policymakers to evaluate transit options for communities in diverse spatiotemporal environments.en_US
Appears in Collections:Open Access Dissertations and Theses

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Tasnim_Sadia_202509_MASc.pdf
Embargoed until: 2026-09-23
4.3 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show simple item record Statistics


Items in MacSphere are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Sherman Centre for Digital Scholarship     McMaster University Libraries
©2022 McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4L8 | 905-525-9140 | Contact Us | Terms of Use & Privacy Policy | Feedback

Report Accessibility Issue