[sustran] transport and the asian econ. debacle

[Bambang Susantono]

Thanks for Paul who bringing in the "TRIPS vs PEOPLE" issue.

Paul is right that the number on my illustration is about trip, not on
people. 

However, using the same ARSDS 1985 data again to illustrate his point
does make me confuse. Despite many caveats in ARSDS, the biggest one is
that ARSDS never did income survey. This fact is well documented in the
following quotation :

" The 1985 ARSDS Home Interview Survey (HIS)  did not collect data about
income, and this is a significant gap in the information about factors
influencing travel choices, as income is a prime determinant of travel
patterns, particularly through its influence on levels of car ownership.
Instead, the ARSDS study assumed a high correlation between household
income and residential class, and determined the income group structure
of the population based on the frequency of households in four
residential clasess (A=high to D= low)...
(Transport Network Planning and Regulation (TNPR) Study: Existing Travel
Demand and Integrated Forecast for Jabotabek, 1992 by Collin Buchanan
et. al., page 15).
 
My illustration only clarifies the specific data on Jakarta and Paul's
point is well taken as one of many approaches to do the "real demand
analysis" or "the basic needs" of public transportation.
 
I will appreciate if any of you can share your experiences on how to
deal with the effect of "informal sector" on the transportation survey
in (particularly) metropolitan cities in developing world.

My best regards,


Bambang Susantono
Jakarta/Berkeley