Public transport strategy

Public transport strategy

Public and private sector bus efficiency in Delhi Measure DTC Private Peak period fleet utilisation (%) 83% 93% Km/bus/day 216 246 Pax/bus/day 751 1584 Staff/bus 9.6 4.6

Forms of competition for the bus market Gross Cost Service Contracting Net Cost Service Contracting Management Contracting Franchising Concession

Some nasty competitive market practices "Hanging back" either on the road or at terminals (Accra) "Blocking" to obstruct rival operators' services (Santiago when deregulated) "Racing" rival vehicles to pick up passengers (Nairobi) "Turning short" (Pusan) Physical violence to deter entry (South Africa)

Pence 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Ten years of competition in London 444 270 Cost per bus mile (-40%) Pence 300 263 250 241 200 150 100 50 0 Revenue per bus mile (-8%) Pence 35 30 29 25 22 20 15 10 5 0 Cost per passenger mile (-22%) Pence 25 20 20 17 15 10 5 0 Revenue per passenger mile (+19%) Pence Pence 250 14 12 200 182 12 150 10 8 100 6 50 29 4 2 2 0 Grant per bus mile (-84%) 0 Grant per passenger mile (-80%) 1984/5 1994/5 (estimated outturn) Source: LRT - Annual figures at 1994 price

Preparing for competition for the market Separate political supervision of public transport d from professional management Separate service planning from service provision, Acquire new procurement skills Privatize or commercialize operations Restructure public company operation units for competition Assist the development of competitive operators associations

Getting the right system Monopolist public suppliers must be restructured for any form of competition Modal co-ordination favors system concessions or gross cost tendering Ease of administration favors net cost tendering Fragmentation of informal sector may call for association Fixed track favors system concessions

Vehicle type Forms of paratransit Service Features Routes Schedules Passenger Capacity Service Niche Market regime Examples Fixed Fixed Large Bus Line-Haul Franchised Buenos Aires, Rostov Minibus Fixed Fixed/Sem i fixed 12-24 Line Haul Franchised Sao Paulo Bangkok, Harare, Jo burg Jeepney Fixed Semi- Fixed Microbus/Pi ck-up Fixed Semi- Fixed 12-24 Feeder Franchised Manila, 4-11 Feeder Licensed Caracas, -do- Variable Variable 4-11 Short trips Licensed Lima 3-Wheeler/ Variable Variable 2-4 Short trips, feeder Motorcycle Variable Variable 1-4 Feeder, some longer distances Pedicab/Hor se-cart Variable Variable 1-6 Short trips, Feeder Unregulated Unregulated Unregulated Phnom Penh, Delhi Bangkok, Jakarta Bangkok, Cotonou, Lome, Douala Dhaka, Vientiane, Mumbai

Problems of informal sector Dangerous on the road behavior Criminal exploitation Urban congestion and externalities Undermining the basic network

Questions on mass transit? What are the objectives of MRT within the city development strategy?? How should MRT policy relationship to urban structure and land use policy?? How does MRT impact on the urban environment?? What factors should be considered in choice of MRT technology?? How should MRT be integrated within broader transport sector policy?? How should MRT be priced to gain maximum benefit?? Who should own and finance MRT?? What is the impact of MRT on the state/municipal finances?

Metros as development projects Planned within a long term structure strategy Co-ordinated with other modal services Co-ordinated fares Appraised in this context Adequately financed

Performance of MRT modes Busway LRT LRT Suburban rail Metro Metro Metro EXAMPLE Segregation (vertical) Segregation (horizontal) Initial cost $m/km. Maximum capacity (pphpd) Operating speed Kph Sao Paulo 9 th Julio Alexandria- Madina Manila Line 1 Mumbai Mexico Line 4 Bangkok BTS Hong Kong Kowloon At grade At grade Elevated At grade At grade Elevated Underground Partial Limited Full Incomplete Complete Complete Complete 1.0 20,000 12,000 80,000 6.0

Variation of costs in metro contracts Costs per km. Madrid Caracas % of Santiago % of (US $ millions) extensions line 4 Madrid line 5 ext. Madrid Total costs per km. 31.18 93.56 300 70.1 225 Civil works 19.69 31.41 160 33.68 171 Equipment costs 5.13 22.48 438 11.56 225 Track 1.27 2.67 210 3.57 281 Power Supply 0.85 8.45 994 2.36 278 Signaling etc. 0.96 6.51 678 4.36 454 Station Equipment 0.61 2.13 349 0.35 57 Escalators and lifts 0.99 2.00 202 0.72 73 Ticketing equipment 0.12 0.68 567 0.20 167 Rolling stock 5.54 25.77 465 17.84 322 Rolling stock (adjusted)** 4.87 10.74 221 8.35 171 Design and management 0.69 4.64 672 8.54 1237 * All costs in US$ at September 2000 exchange rates ** Adjusted to capacity of 10,000 pax/hr at 4 standing passengers at per m2

Financial performance of metros City Rev/op cost Rev/Pass (US c) Cost/pkm (US c) Corridor Traffic (M/day) Hong Kong 2.2 40.5 2.0 9.1 Santiago 1.6 16.8 2.0 2.7 Seoul 1.4 21.5 1.7 12.7 Pusan 1.0 20.7 2.6 3.6 Sao Paulo 0.6 9.1 1.9 11.2 Rio 0.5 11.3 4.6 4.3 Mexico City 0.4 4.1 1.2 10.1 Calcutta 0.4 8.1 3.0 1.0

Problems of public transport integration? Fragmentation of operational responsibility between modes? Jurisdictional fragmentation of modal? Bus service planning the responsibility of an external agency? Bus operators resist the reduction in their overall market share.? Restructuring of the formal bus services undermined by paratransit

Minimum criteria for subsidy? Subsidy should be embodied in a contract not open ended? The right to provide subsidized service should be subject to competitive tender? The level of acceptable subsidy for a service or agency should be subject to explicit cost benefit appraisal? The cost of the subsidy must be fiscally sustainable.

Strategy On Planning and Integration? Integrate into the planning of metropolitan structure, transport and finance within a comprehensive long term structure plan for the city;? Public sector must set strategy, including identifying projects, tariffs and any contingent changes to the existing transport system.? Public sector must acquire land and easements, ensure development permissions.? Physical and fares co-ordination within a comprehensive transport strategy plan.? Integrated implementation management, with arrangements put in place to facilitate co-ordination between multiple public agencies.? Comprehensive financial planning

On competition? Planning of public transport service should be separated from provision.? Competition should be recognized as the best way of securing good value for money in public transport? In complex cities competition for the market may be the best form,? City administrations should be restructured to facilitate competitive procurement of services

On para transit and the informal sector? Recognize the role of paratransit in satisfying dispersed trip patterns and addressing the demands of the poor? Manage anti-competitive or antisocial behavior within the sector through enforcement of quality controls? Mobilize the potential of the informal sector through legalizing associations and through structuring of franchising arrangements

On mass rapid transit? Incorporate mass transit systems in city-wide price level and structure plans.? Even if private finance is involved, mass transit investments should be consistent with an approved city structure plan Estimate in advance the full cost of new mass transit investments on municipal budgets and on fares Make no commitment to expenditure in the absence of secure long term funding.

On pricing and financing? General fare controls should be determined as part of a comprehensive city transport financing plan,? Estimate and consider effect of fare controls on the expected quality and quantity of service? Fare reductions or exemptions should be financed on the budget of the relevant line agency? Modally integrated fares schemes should be assessed for their impacts on the poor.