Is free public transport a good idea? It depends on who gets on board
- Written by: Milad Haghani, Associate Professor and Principal Fellow in Urban Risk and Resilience, The University of Melbourne
Petrol prices in Australia have risen sharply over the past six weeks. In early February, prices in major cities were around 160–180 cents per litre. By mid-March, they had increased to approximately 230–240 cents per litre.
More recent reports indicate prices have risen further, exceeding $2.50 per litre on average, with some locations approaching $3 per litre. Despite the government cutting fuel excise and prices dropping slightly, petrol is still well above 200 cents a litre.
In response to rising prices , some states have introduced free public transport. From March 31 to April 30, travelling around Victoria will be free. Tasmania has similarly introduced free bus and ferry travel.
Queensland already operates heavily subsidised fares, with a flat 50-cent fare across its network introduced in 2024.
Other states, including New South Wales, have not introduced fare relief measures. NSW Premier Chris Minns has ruled it out, arguing the fiscal cost would be substantial if fuel prices remain elevated for an extended period, and that short-term fare relief is difficult to sustain.
But, to what extent do free or heavily discounted public transport fares change travel behaviour during this time? Do they reduce petrol demand? And how evenly are the cost-of-travel benefits distributed across the population?
Who’s getting on board?
The free public transport measures introduced by Victoria and Tasmania aim to achieve two outcomes.
The first is to reduce the cost of travel. The second is to reduce reliance on car travel and, in turn, demand for petrol during this period. The success of both depends on whether these measures lead to a shift away from driving.
Evidence consistently shows fare reductions increase public transport use. And larger fare reductions and longer periods produce larger increases in patronage.
Since the introduction of the 50-cent flat fare, public transport patronage in Queensland has increased by around 18% in the first six months and over 20% over first year.
But the source of that increase matters.
In Queensland, beyond anecdotal evidence, there is limited evidence on how much of this reflects a shift away from car travel.
Existing empirical evidence from overseas suggests additional demand does not come entirely from car users. A substantial share comes from existing public transport users travelling more often, as well as from shifts away from walking or cycling, with only a modest share coming from car users.
All about access
Free or heavily discounted public transport does not benefit all travellers equally. The ability to use the system depends on access to the network and the nature of the trip.
Those who live within walking distance of public transport, or who can reliably access park-and-ride facilities (car parks with connections to public transport), are best placed to benefit.
This is particularly the case for trips to central business districts, where services are more frequent and direct.
By contrast, travel between suburbs is often less well served, with lower frequencies, indirect routes, and longer travel times. In outer suburban and regional areas, public transport options may be limited.
Household travel patterns can further constrain switching. Trips that involve school drop-offs, childcare, or coordinating multiple destinations are often less compatible with public transport, particularly where timing and flexibility are critical.
Where public transport is not a viable option, travellers face fewer choices. They may reduce or cancel trips where possible, including working from home, or continue to rely on private cars despite higher fuel costs.
Lasting change?
Most of the existing evidence on fare-free or heavily subsidised public transport comes from periods when fuel prices were relatively stable. This limits how directly those findings can be applied to the current situation.
Even so, these measures are likely to reduce some pressure on petrol demand in the short term. The extent of that effect remains uncertain and will depend on how many travellers are able, and willing, to switch away from cars.
What makes the current setting different and unique is the combination of a sharp increase in the cost of driving and a temporary removal of public transport fares. This creates a stronger incentive to reconsider travel choices than price changes on either side alone.
This means there is also a potential for longer-term effects. Exposure to public transport among otherwise car users may reduce perceived barriers, improve familiarity with the system and lead to habit formation.
Behavioural evidence shows exposure can lead to habit formation, where behaviours persist even after the initial incentive is removed.
Evidence shows behaviour change is more likely when people alter their daily travel routines. Such habit disruptions can weaken car dependency and increase openness to alternatives.
Evidence from the London 2012 Olympic Games provides a clear example. A notable share of travellers altered their usual behaviour during the event, and some of these changes are understood to have persisted beyond the Games.
Similar patterns were also observed during the COVID period, where forced shifts to remote work resulted in some lingering changes in behaviour.
This suggests the current measures in Victoria and Tasmania may function as a unique natural experiment, with outcomes that could differ meaningfully from those observed in previous settings.
While past evidence points to modest shifts away from car travel, the present conditions create a stronger basis for behavioural change, at least for some segments of the population. The longer these schemes remain in place, and fuel prices remain elevated, the stronger these effects are likely to be.
Authors: Milad Haghani, Associate Professor and Principal Fellow in Urban Risk and Resilience, The University of Melbourne
