Cancelling the Rural School Bus Route
A rural secondary school has 220 students. Its sole public bus route, used by 38 students, is being cancelled because the regional council says it costs $52,000 a year to run and fares recover only $9,500. The next nearest bus stop is 7 km away on an unlit road with no footpath. Twenty-two of the 38 students live more than 10 km from school; 11 are Māori and travel to a bilingual unit; 6 have mobility or health needs. The school’s own survey found that if the bus stopped, 14 families would drive, 9 would rely on lifts, and 5 students might not attend regularly. A proposed 12-seat electric shuttle would cost $38,000 a year plus a $55,000 vehicle, and could do two runs. A parents’ carpool has no formal coordination. The council wants a decision before the end of term.
1. Identify the environmental, social, cultural and economic dimensions of the bus cancellation. Explain how they interact rather than sitting separately.
Read the worked answer
Economic: $52,000 cost versus $9,500 fares; the council sees a subsidy. But the bus also supports attendance, which underpins school funding and family employment. Social: 38 students lose a safe route; 7 km on an unlit road with no footpath is a safety risk; 6 students with mobility or health needs may be most affected. Cultural: 11 students travel to a bilingual unit; losing transport can weaken access to te reo Māori education, a cultural equity issue. Environmental: 14 families driving may add vehicle trips and emissions, but the effect depends on distance, vehicle occupancy and whether trips are already made. Interactions: a narrow cost-saving decision shifts costs onto families, safety and emissions; the bus is not just a transport line but a condition for participation. A systems view would count avoided car trips and attendance benefits, not only fares.
2. Recommend a decision using a decision-making framework. Include at least two criteria, one uncertainty, and one monitoring indicator.
Read the worked answer
Framework: weighted criteria - safety, equitable access, annual cost, emissions, cultural access, feasibility. Options: (A) cancel, (B) 12-seat electric shuttle, (C) coordinated carpool plus shuttle, (D) reroute a larger bus. Scoring: A is cheapest but worst on safety and equity and likely raises car emissions; B costs $38,000 a year plus a $55,000 vehicle but keeps a safe service and can do two runs; C is cheaper but depends on drivers and may not cover the 5 at risk; D may be efficient if it serves other routes. Uncertainty: whether 14 families actually drive, and whether the EV shuttle can complete two runs on one charge in winter. Recommendation: pilot B for two terms with a formal carpool backup, funded by combining the avoided $52,000 with fares; set a review trigger if ridership falls below 28 or costs exceed $45,000. Monitoring: attendance of the 38 students, car trips, safety incidents, cost per passenger, and feedback from the bilingual unit. This is defensible because it tests the highest-equity option while measuring the uncertainty, rather than assuming either cancellation or a permanent shuttle is right.