Modernizing Public Transport Webinar


Published on

1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Modernizing Public Transport Webinar

  1. 1. Modernizing Public Transport: Lessons Learned from Bus Reforms in Latin America and Asia Dario Hidalgo, PhD Aileen Carrigan, MUP December 14th, 2010 1
  2. 2.
  3. 3. Projects with very different scope BRT - Guanzhou Optibus – Leon, Guanajuato TransantiagoIntegration Metropolitano - Lima TransMilenio - Bogotá RIT - Curitiba Metrovía - Guayaquil Megabús - Pereira Interligado – Sao Paulo MIO - Cali Macrobús - Guadalajara Transmetro - Barranquilla Metrolínea- Bucaramanga Metrobús – Mexico (1, 2) Janmarg – AhmedabadNo Integration Jakarta (1, 2, 3) Istanbul, Turkey Quito (Trole, Ecovía, North) Rea Vaya -Johannesburg BRT – Beijing (1, 2, 3) Transmetro – Guatemala One corridor Several corridors Route reorganization Feeder lines of the whole city Reviewed 5
  4. 4. All the reviewed systems include BRT components Centralized control Stations with prepayment Distinctive and level access image Exclusive bus lanes Large buses with multiple doors 6
  5. 5. Project focus: structural change in transit provision, not just to build and operate BRT corridors Traditional Operation* Transformed Operation New private companies under Private operators or associations contracts and with strongunder permits or concessions, with supervision of government weak supervision by government (new agencies)* Not applicable to Beijing, Ahmedabad Sao Paulo
  6. 6. Traditional Operation* Transformed Operation Competition for the market (bidding process) Competition in the market or consolidation of existing(“guerra del centavo” penny war) operators (direct negotiation with of new contracts/concessions)* Not aplicable to Beijing, Ahmedabad, partial in Sao Paulo
  7. 7. Diverse Sizes (2009)
  8. 8. Varied throughput (2009)
  9. 9. Commercial speed (2009)
  10. 10. Operational productivity (2009)
  11. 11. Capital productivity (2009)
  12. 12. Capital Cost (2009)
  13. 13. User Fares (2009)
  14. 14. Common issues in Planning• Insufficient funding for studies and design Foto: URBS, 2000• Lack of experience with BRT (staff and local consultants)• Implementation focus, not adequate preparation Trinary Road System-Curitiba• Low user fares – tight financial planning• Local implementation teams outside Foto: D. Hidalgo 2006 existing bureaucracy (latter staff of new agencies) Trolebús en el Centro Histórico - Quito 19
  15. 15. Decision Processes• Political will and leadership at the top level  fast Foto: D. Hidalgo 2006 implementation• Need for regulatory and instutional changes (creation of new agencies) Northwestern Terminal – León, México• Funding from external or Foto: D. Hidalgo 2006 new sources Metrobús Insurgentes – México DF 20
  16. 16. Rushed implementation – most difficulties solved within few weeks• Incomplete infrastructure and fare collection and control systems Foto: J. Ernst 2005• Lack of training for bus operators• Insufficient user education Jakarta• Public protests Foto: D. Hidalgo 2006 Beijing BRT 21
  17. 17. Common operational concerns• High occupancy levels• Long waiting times for feeder services• Road surface maintenance• Pick-pocketing 22
  18. 18. The main structural problems are institutional or regulatory• User fares are defined after political negotiations – absence of operational subsidies - financial stress• Expansion is difficult after initial lines – Opposition from existing operators – Lack of political priority and funding for infrastructure• Lack of dedicated funding for maintenance• Lack of integration with normal bus services (except Santiago, which suffered from profound planning and implementation difficulties) Megabús – Pereira Metrovía - Guayaquil 23 Transantiago - Santiago Fotos: D. Hidalgo 2006, 2007
  19. 19. Despite issues, most systems have been succesful• Quality and performance are better than in the systems they replaced• Main achievement: travel time reduction and increased safety and reliability – Efficiency gains resulted in reduced energy consumption and decreased pollutant emissions – Improved urban environments 24
  20. 20. Common problems Wrong What Went • Rushed implementation – several components incomplete • Very tight financial planning – non technical user fares • Very high occupancy levels (160 pax/bus standard for articulated buses is not accepted by the users) • Early deterioriation of infrastructure (lack of road surface reinforcement or problems in design/construction) • Implementation of fare collection systems requires longer time tables and very tight supervision • Insufficient user education Filename/RPS Number
  21. 21. Recommendations• Planning• Decision process• Type of implementation• Implementation process• Design and operation• Structural issues• Further studies 26
  22. 22. ¡Muchas Gracias!