#8 A Passenger Centric Framework for Urban Mass Transit
What should be the goals for a good mass transit network in a city keeping the interest of passengers front and centre.
My wife Amrita and I like to travel.
While we do not mind the occasional trip to the country, we are primarily city travellers. We find that society is often at its most vibrant in urban centres. Mingling with and observing people as they go about their lives is a great thrill and probably teaches us more about humanity than any book ever could.
Every time we visit a city, we like to use public transport as much as we can rather than go around in private vehicles and taxi cabs. In Indian cities, this is unfortunately not very easy. Most, perhaps all, of our urban mass transit seems to have been haphazardly planned without much thought on integration and passenger convenience. Our cities are increasingly being designed for private cars or two-wheelers.
Those who don't own personal vehicles are forced to depend on app cabs or bikes or informal public transport such as autos, rickshaws and “shuttle” taxis that run point-to-point. This results in more congestion, leading to productive time wasted in transit. Congestion and the use of personal vehicles moving people in small numbers at a time also increases pollution.
How should one think about a transit system from the point of view of passengers, who are the primary stakeholders?
Based on our experience of various cities in the world that have some of the best mass transit, my idle brain has formed a framework for what constitutes good mass transit. I have also read several papers and books on the subject, some of which I will reference, but I did not find a comprehensive framework for evaluating mass transit anywhere. So, here goes.
The framework
This framework is based on ease of travel for passengers. It does not look at constraints that the state may have in developing such a network. It is up to the state to decide how to leverage public and private resources to achieve a mass transit network that fulfils these parameters.
1. Access or availability (A)
Any passenger should have the ability to walk comfortably or cycle, if they prefer, to their nearest transit stop. For instance, while going to work, I should be able to step out of my home and walk on a sidewalk or pedestrian path to the nearest bus or tram stop, train or metro station. On the other end, when I get off at the stop nearest to my workplace, I should be able to walk there easily.
What is the maximum distance I should have to walk to or from my nearest stop? That does depend on the weather, but 500 m may be a reasonable maximum for anyone who doesn’t have mobility issues. Of course, good quality and safe walkways and sidewalks are a pre-requisite here. While I don’t want to go into walkability in detail in this post, walkability goes hand in hand with mass transit.
What of those who either do not want to or cannot walk or cycle 500 m due to health or mobility issues? Well, they can use autos or rickshaws or even their own private car and driver to access the nearest transit stop. For people with severe mobility issues, there may be no choice but to use private cars or cabs.
2. Frequency (F)
When I reach the nearest bus, tram, or train stop, I would like to have a vehicle come by that either goes directly or connects part of the way to my destination within a reasonable time period. A good frequency would reduce my wait time and also the crowd in the carriage which helps with some of the other parameters discussed later.
What may be considered reasonable frequency?
That depends on the time of day. During rush hour and on busy routes, a frequency of 5 minutes or less per arrival should be normal. It may go down to as low as 30 minutes per arrival at odd hours, say between midnight and 6 am and on less busy routes. We should approach this scientifically using data to optimise routes and schedules for passenger convenience while keeping costs as low as possible.
However, anyone who wants to use mass transit anywhere in the city, at any time of day or night, should be able to use it with a reasonable wait. Even at 30 minutes between transport arrivals, the average wait time will be 15 minutes, and the maximum will be 30 minutes, which is probably acceptable for most. This should be non-negotiable to help build people’s trust in mass transit.
3. Affordability or pricing (P)
The whole point of a mass transit network is that the masses should be able to use it without putting a strain on their budgets.
India’s per capita GDP, as per the IMF, is around USD 2,900, which translates to INR 240,000 or 2.4 lakhs per year. This is not identical to the mean income but is a reasonable proxy to use. What would be a reasonable amount for an individual earning 2.4 lakhs per year on transport, excluding private transport?
A reasonable cap for transport may be 10% of the average income, which would be INR 24,000 for the year or about INR 2,000 per month. Of course, there is a wide variation in the per capita incomes of our states and cities, so we can apply the 10% cap based on local per capita incomes to be more effective. Assuming an average of 15 trips a week or around 65 trips a month, including work, shopping and leisure, by mass transit, we can propose a reasonable cost of INR 30 per trip to keep the total costs at INR 2,000 a month.
A trip may include a single ride on a bus, tram or train or multiple rides on a combination of transportation modes. The key in a country like India is to keep the average cost of a trip below INR 30. In a richer city like Delhi, Bengaluru or Kochi, this could go up to, say, INR 40 per trip, while in a poorer city like Kolkata, Lucknow or Indore, it may come down to, say, INR 20 per trip, but the underlying principle remains the same. Only by making mass transit affordable can we incentivise people to use it ahead of informal transportation like autos.
There is a debate in India on whether mass transit, specifically buses, should be free, especially for women. The key is to keep it affordable, that is, below a certain price point. Beyond that, whether it should be completely free or not is a socio-political question that goes beyond the scope of this discussion. I personally feel that a small price, greater than zero, is useful to remind the user of the value of what they are using. It also helps curb idling on or overuse of buses or trains to make sure that users with a real need can use the capacity when they want to.
4. Reliability (R)
When I wait for the bus, I expect it to show up at the scheduled time and frequency. Once I board it, the bus also needs to get me to my destination in a timely manner. Of course, for modes like buses and trams that share roads with other types of traffic, this depends on the level of congestion on the roads. But that is exactly where mass transit helps by reducing congestion and helping all users get to their destination in a predictable manner.
Well-planned mass transit also implies measures to ensure that buses and trams that share road space with other kinds of traffic are prioritised to ensure they can keep to their schedules. Mass transit vehicles should not break down frequently, so good maintenance is essential as well. Reliability is essential for users to have confidence in using mass transit. If a student needs to reach his exam centre or an applicant her interview on time, they should feel confident that using mass transit will not add risk.
5. Safety (S)
Practically speaking, it is not possible for everyone to access mass transit at their doorstep. As discussed in item 1 above, it is essential for me to be able to walk safely to my nearest transit stop. This implies that the sidewalks or pedestrian pathways I use are easy to access, level, unbroken, well made and easy to walk on unobstructed, with means to cross traffic safely.
This again goes into the realm of walkability. To reiterate, there cannot be effective mass transit without walkability. I should not worry about tripping and falling on a broken or excessively high sidewalk. I should not have to walk parallel to traffic and risk being run over. I should not have to cross a road while traffic refuses to stop and puts me in danger. The same applies to those who cycle to access transit, but we should prioritise walking to transit even above cycling to transit.
The bus or tram stop itself needs to be designed in a way that I can stand or sit there safely. I should not have to stand on the road, and risk having traffic hit me. The bus should stop close to the left curb near the bus stop so that I can board the bus in a protected zone without traffic coming up on me. In the case of a train or metro system, this is not a major issue as those tend to be protected by buildings.
When on the bus or tram, the vehicle needs to travel in an orderly manner that doesn’t risk the safety of passengers. Bad driving by buses often makes it difficult for the elderly or infirm to ride on buses. If they brake and accelerate hard or veer sharply, standing or even sitting involves some risk. This links back to overall driver education and road safety. But anyone driving public transport needs to be extra cautious to get their passengers to their destination safely.
The final aspect of safety involves crimes on buses, trains or trams. If mass transit is heavily used, it will generally be safe for everyone, apart from petty crime like pickpocketing. However, special care should be taken for off hours or less used routes to ensure that even a single woman on a bus feels safe in taking transit. Use of transit use should be ubiquitous and normalised at all times of day and night.
6. Comfort (C)
Comfort may seem trivial.
The common perception is that mass transit is used by the “aam aadmi”, and they do not care too much about comfort. I don’t know whether this is true or not, but isn’t it our duty as a society to ensure that the “aam aadmi” or woman is treated to a reasonable level of comfort? That is not only moral and important for their health and well-being but also instrumental. Comfort allows them to reach their destination not feeling drained, and therefore, helps their productivity.
Further, if public transport is indeed comfortable, people will not mind swapping their cars and bikes for it. Even the relatively affluent will not think twice about using transit. This aids the feedback loop since the affluent have a more powerful voice that can often help bring about further improvements to our transit systems.
Comfort implies good ventilation and air circulation, along with air conditioning when the weather is warm. A vast majority of our buses and suburban trains do not have air conditioning today, and that stops many people from using them, especially in hot weather. Further, there should be ample and well-designed seating, and even the standing areas should have easy hand-holds and backrests.
Low floors for buses, trams and trains should allow passengers with minor mobility issues to board with ease. At least some carriages, if not all, on every route, should have the facility to take wheelchairs and bicycles. This urban bus and train design is fairly standard across the world. We have many such buses and metro coaches even in our Indian cities. The goal should be to extend them to all routes and services.
7. Sustainability or environmental friendliness (E)
Mass transit, by default, is more sustainable and environmentally friendly than private modes of transport since buses, trams, and trains move vastly more people in a smaller footprint than, say, a car or an auto rickshaw.
For instance, 6 medium-sized auto rickshaws, or tuk tuks as they are called in some parts of the world, may carry 18 people with some safety and comfort. At a stretch, compromising safety and comfort, they may carry 30. Other private vehicles or individual or informal transport tends to carry less than this. A single-decker 9-metre local bus occupies the same footprint as 6 autos and can easily carry 35 seating passengers, depending on the configuration, along with another 25 standing. Double-deckers can carry an average of 90 passengers, going up to 120, depending on the configuration.
Trams have similar capacities, while suburban and metro trains tend to have higher passenger density. Modern trains have the added advantage of being powered by live electricity, which makes them even more environmentally friendly. Trolley buses, which are also powered by live electricity from overhead lines but do not run on rails or tracks, or even battery-powered electric buses, can make bus networks more sustainable.
The point of this framework is to emphasise that focusing only on some aspects of urban mass transit does not make it effective as a tool for mobility and productivity. For instance, if 6 out of 7 framework elements are satisfactory, but the transit is priced so highly that most people will not be able to use it as their primary mode of transportation, the system will be underutilised. This may cause neglect and atrophy over time. Also, this means that people who are priced out of the system may prefer to use informal and cheaper modes of transport, even two-wheelers, leading to heavy congestion and defeating the purpose of transit.
In future posts, we can use this framework to evaluate the state of mass transit in some cities. We can also apply this passenger-centric framework to understand the market failure in mass transit, and how it may be addressed.
References
Jain, & Tiwari (2024). The framework for public transport in our cities: Thoughts and suggestions - Question of Cities. Question of Cities. https://questionofcities.org/the-framework-for-public-transport-in-our-cities-thoughts-and-suggestions/
Miller, Patrick & De Barros, Alexandre & Kattan, Lina & Wirasinghe, S.C.. (2016). Public transportation and sustainability: A review. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering. 20. 1076-1083. 10.1007/s12205-016-0705-0.
A Framework for Evaluation and Design of an Integrated Public Transport System
Eriksson, A. (2008). A Framework for Evaluation and Design of an Integrated Public Transport System (Master’s thesis, Lund University). Diva Portal. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2%3A22533/FULLTEXT01.pdfLitman, T. (2016). Public Transportation and Sustainability: A Review. ResearchGate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/297741118_Public_transportation_and_sustainability_A_review
Evaluate your bus system. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.ppiaf.org/sites/ppiaf.org/files/documents/toolkits/UrbanBusToolkit/assets/1/evaluate.html