more on [sustran] South Africa's Transport Policy (or lack thereof)

[Institute for Transportation and Development Policy]

Some further thoughts on S. Africa re Eric's comments: 

At 09:40 AM 3/3/98 -0500, Eric Bruun wrote:
>
> 
>I have two additional concerns besides the violence between the
>combi-taxi operators, and the anti-planning policies defended
>by these operators:
>
>1) Should we automatically conclude that providing no operating 
>subsidy is the best choice, presumably because the money is needed
>elsewhere? 

The commuter rail and bus systems are already pretty heavily subsidized.
The commuter rail lines need to be modernized, and this is going to take
capital subsidies. There are discussions with the French I believe for some
foreign aid, but I'm not sure of the conditions.  Codatu in Cape Town in
September should clarify this.  Combis are also subsidized in that the state
pays for the roads.  

 Isn't mobility of people central to economic development?
>What if the fares are too high or service is too poor where people
>want to go? If the wealthy (meaning mostly white people) in South
>Africa can pollute freely in order to drive where ever they want,
>isn't this a valid reason for counter-subsidies to people that
>don't?  

I agree theres a justification for subsidies.  But in the case of the
combi-taxis, the only way to subsidize them would be through some sort of
transit vouchers.  But even this system would probably require a level of
regulation of the combi-business that would meet with considerable
resistance from the industry itself.  Lack of subsidies is the quid-pro-quo
of lack of regulation, which allows them to avoid paying taxes, and avoid
other sorts of regulations. 

Correct me if I am mistaken, but isn't part of the violence
>in Johannesburg rooted in the desperation of owner/operators that
>are in financial distress?

I don't think so.  I think its more like the conflict between drug mafias
competing for turf.    
 

>2) Can South Africa, with its big and dense cities, really stake its
>future on private cars, jitneys, and a few select comfortable bus
>services for commuters?  Shouldn't it be investing in busways,
>rejuvenating its rail services, etc.? 

There is an HOV lane now on the major highway between Johannesburg and
Soweto.  They elected to use an HOV rather than a bus lane as it
accommodates the combi-taxis as well.  A bus lane that excluded the combis
would have been political suicide I think and certainly defeated the point.
Certainly more could be done in this regard. 

> It sounds to me like the 
>present policy is mostly just a continuation of starving the needs
>of the majority, just like the apartheid days.

I think its not a good idea to see a fire wall between housing needs and
transport needs. We need to look at what is going on in housing policy as
well. Last I looked into it, the housing minister had elected to give all
income-eligible folks a one time capital grant for building a house, which
made it virtually impossible to build multiple-unit high density housing in
more central areas and virtually ensured further sprawl.  Lots of
ex-township folks are also moving into town into high density neighborhoods
like Hillbrow, Yeoville, etc. and these parts of town are decaying rapidly.
Unless some sort of housing subsidy for renters is set up, and unless the
capital grants can be utilized for higher density housing develoment closer
to the center, the attempts to address the housing problem will only make
the mobility problem worse. 

We're still interested in doing policy work in S.Africa. If anyone is
working there we're happy to cooperate. 

Rgds, 
Walter Hook 
>
>
>
>On Mon, 2 Mar 1998, Institute for Transportation and Development Policy wrote:
>
>> RE Eric Bruun and WEndell Cox's comments on S.AFrica and the combi-taxis
>> 
>> 
>> While the combi-taxis have done a great job creating jobs among black
>> S.Africans even before the fall of aparteid, and provide a reasonably good
>> service, with no subsidies (other than they highways they use, of course)
>> the lack of route regulation has led to the equivalent of gangland violence
>> between taxi companies competing for turf.  
>> 
>> Furthermore, the political power of the black taxi industry also made it
>> virtually impossible for us to put in decent bicycle parking facilities at
>> the commuter rail stations in the townships.  We had the agreement of the
>> Soweto planning office for a nice bike-and-ride strategy, but we were told
>> in confidence that it was vetoed by the combi-taxi industry which saw it,
>> correctly, as a threat.  
>> 
>> Unfortunately, for markets to function properly in the transport sector,
>> some regulation appears to be required.  
>> 
>> There is some discussion at the Group for Environmental Monitoring to take
>> up transport this year as a major area of work (after our urging them since
>> at least 1995).  
>> 
>> 
>> Rgds, 
>> Walter Hook 
>> 
>> At 01:28 PM 3/2/98 -0600, Wendell Cox wrote:
>> >Some comments on The Mail and Guardian editorial....
>> >
>> >Re: No alternative has been presented to coax motorists, many travelling
>> >alone in their
>> >                               cars, away from the daily traffic jams. What
>> >about the damage to the
>> >                               environment? Must our cities be completely
>> >choked by pollution like Mexico City
>> >                               or Athens before Maharaj takes any action on
>> >car emissions? 
>> >
>> >Where have such alternatives worked?
>> >
>> >Perhaps SA should ensure that it follows the US lead in auto pollution
>> >technology for cars --- this is the only way that the pollution problem
>> >related to cars will be solved, and it is being solved.
>> >
>> >>Since the policy, or lack of policy, has consisted mostly of leaving
>> >>things to the market, and with a refusal to subsidize public
>> >>transportation, I would like to hear whether readers agree with
>> >>the editorial.  Eric Bruun
>> >>
>> >It's not such a bad thing to leave these things to the market, especially
>> >when you consider the robust kombi-taxi industry, both in terms of its
>> >potential to move passengers (if permitted) and the entrepreneurial path
>> >that it provides to people trying to move up the economic ladder.
>> >
>> >With all of the social needs in SA --- housing, education, jobs, etc., etc.,
>> >it is not surprising, nor is it necessarily inappropriate for subsidies to
>> >public transport to take a :"back seat."
>> >
>> >Best regards,
>> >Wendell Cox
>> >WENDELL COX CONSULTANCY
>> >International Public Policy, Economics, Labour, Transport & Strategic
Planning
>> >The Public Purpose: Internet Public Policy Journal
>> >http://www.publicpurpose.com
>> >Voice +1 618 632 8507; Fax  +1 618 632 8538
>> >P.O. Box 841- Belleville, Illinois 62222 USA
>> >
>> >"To facilitate the ideal of government as the servant  of the people by
>> >identifying and implementing strategies to achieve public purposes at a cost
>> >that is no higher than necessary."
>> >
>> >
>> 
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
>> 
>> 	The Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP)
>> 	115 West 30th Street,  Suite 1205
>> 	New York, NY 10001
>> 	Tel 212-629 8001, Fax 212-629 8033  
>> 	mobility at igc.apc.org
>> 
>> 
>> 
>
>

________________________________________________________________________________

	The Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP)
	115 West 30th Street,  Suite 1205
	New York, NY 10001
	Tel 212-629 8001, Fax 212-629 8033  
	mobility at igc.apc.org