[sustran] Re: (fwd) [UTSG] transport strategy transfer

[Jonathan E. D. Richmond]

On Sat, 24 Apr 2004, Brendan Finn wrote:

> Jonathon,
>
> Taking Bangkok as an example, is there any practical way to provide bus
> services on a commercial basis at fares affordable to the poor with anything
> other than low-quality, low-cost buses ?

I do not know yet. I expect this to be a subject of my research this
summer. One of my students is also going to be working on issues of
transit industry cost structures, so I hope to have some data later in the
year, although -- given the difficulties of pinning down anything of a
facual nature in this environment -- I cannot say that I will have
anything worthy of forming firm conclusions.


 If there is, I'd like to hear it,
> since it seems to be an intractable puzzle in many countries.
>
> My experience in the CIS is that you can cover direct operating costs of old
> vehicles at low fares. To move to a new vehicle - however basic - requires a
> premium fare compared to the "social" fare. In part this reflects the high
> cost of capital, linked to low security of tenure on the route, and hence
> higher interest both to reflect the risk and the lack of financial weight of
> the borrower. In greater part, though, is the relative cost of hard assets
> compared to the fares income. In Russia, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan, I have
> seen no shortage of takers for the premium fare services, which offer a much
> higher quality of service in the eyes of the users - a seat, speed,
> cleanliness, and much less unwanted proximity (especially for women). Of
> course, this leaves the social travel and the poorest with the low-cost
> services, leading them inexorably down the sinkhole.

Exactly: and in Bangkok I think you will find that this group accounts for
a very large share of the population and -- particularly -- of the
transit-using population.

>
> I find myself agreeing with others that BRT in itself should not have
> negative impact on low-cost services, unless they are excluded from it
> simply because they are deemed not modern enough. In that case the fault is
> not BRT but the implemented policies.

However, those policies are the central issue. If BRT is used as an excuse
to increase fares, then the poor will be excluded and likely left on
nonaircon buses stuck in congestion outside the busways.


 But there is a very valid case to
> exclude rustbuckets and unroadworthy vehicles. There is also a very good
> case to exclude stopping services where they hamper the flow of other bus
> services.

Stopping services are also the ones most used by low income people who
have no alternative for a whole range of day-to-day travel needs.
Relatively higher-income people will prefer the non-stop services which
take htem to central work destinations and will have cars available for
non-work trips.



>
> I guess a factor to take into account is whether the economy and people's
> wages and living conditions are in transition. It is reasonable to aim to
> transform the public transport services to better quality in line with the
> improvements experienced in other walks of life, and to charge more for it.
>

I think that BRT could have an important role in improving bus
functionality in Bangkok, but I also think that much more of a basic
nature needs to be done first to bring discipline to bus operations and
basic levels of quality to services as a whole. Political issues do have
to be incorporated into planning -- they are generally neglected by
Western consultants, and that is a prime cause of dysfunctionality in the
implementation which ensues. My concern is for the lowest-income users,
who constitute the largest group but who are the most liable to be left
out when any kind of modernization program comes into effect --Jonathan


> With best wishes,
>
>
> Brendan Finn,
> ETTS, Ireland.
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Contact details are : e-mail : etts at indigo.ie   tel : +353.87.2530286
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jonathan E. D. Richmond" <richmond at alum.mit.edu>
> To: <karl at dnet.net.id>; "Asia and the Pacific sustainable transport"
> <sustran-discuss at list.jca.apc.org>
> Sent: Friday, April 23, 2004 8:46 AM
> Subject: [sustran] Re: (fwd) [UTSG] transport strategy transfer
>
>
> >
> > Karl, I am not really talking about differences between the 4 baht and 5
> > baht buses (the 5 baht blue/white ones also being nonaircon), but between
> > the 4/5 baht buses and the 20 baht aircon ones. I am planning to get some
> > hard data, such as is available, over the summer, but the very fact that
> > the nonaircon buses run on the same routes as aircon ones and that crowds
> > of people will wait for the cheaper services to save money suggests that
> > price is an issue in choosing bus services as much as between bus and
> rail.
> >
> > You will remember that the government representative at the recent UN
> > conference on BRT explicitly said he was not interested in keeping low
> > fares should premium services be provided. The trend in Thailand has been
> to
> > provide extremely low-quality services for the poor at low fares and to
> > price anything else much higher. It is politically difficult to increase
> the
> > cost of existing services, and there is a strong constituency for the 4
> > baht fare, but we have seen that when new services are introduced --
> > whether on the Skytrain, underground or with aircon buses, the
> > opportunity is taken to charge much more: amounts which are far beyond
> > the ability of people of low income to pay.
> >
> > I am not saying BRT programs are bad -- they would bring important
> > benefits to Bangkok -- but I am warning that they may not be for the
> > masses as implemented in a Thai context.
> >
> > I am going to have to get you to come and speak to my students at AIT
> > before long!!!
> >
> > Best,
> >
> >                  --Jonathan
> >
> > -----
> >
> > Jonathan E. D. Richmond                               02 524-5510 (office)
> > Visiting Fellow                               Intl.: 662 524-5510
> > Transportation Engineering program
> > School of Civil Engineering, Room N260B               02 524-8257 (home)
> > Asian Institute of Technology                 Intl.: 662 524-8257
> > PO Box 4
> > Klong Luang, Pathumthani 12120                        02 524-5509 (fax)
> > Thailand                                      Intl:  662 524-5509
> >
> > e-mail: richmond at ait.ac.th               Secretary:  Ms. Nisarat Hansuksa
> >         richmond at alum.mit.edu               02 524-6051
> >       Intl:  662 524-6051
> > http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/
> >
> >
>

-----

Jonathan E. D. Richmond                               02 524-5510 (office)
Visiting Fellow                               Intl.: 662 524-5510
Transportation Engineering program
School of Civil Engineering, Room N260B               02 524-8257 (home)
Asian Institute of Technology                 Intl.: 662 524-8257
PO Box 4
Klong Luang, Pathumthani 12120                        02 524-5509 (fax)
Thailand                                      Intl:  662 524-5509

e-mail: richmond at ait.ac.th               Secretary:  Ms. Nisarat Hansuksa
        richmond at alum.mit.edu		              02 524-6051
					      Intl:  662 524-6051
http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/