Achmad Wicaksono Associate Professor

Civil Engineering Dept.

Brawijaya University

Indonesia

The Need to Impoved Urban Transit

In Developing Countries

(A Case of Greater Malang)

INTRODUCTION

Location of East Java Province

Batas Negara

Garis Pantai

Ibukota Propinsi

Ibukota Negara

Keterangan :

BIAK

MANOKWARI

MALUKU

JAYAPURA

PAPUA

MERAUKE

MANADO

TERNATE

SULAWESI

KENDARI

PALU

PONTIANAK

PALANGKARAYA

BANJARMASIN

KALIMANTAN

SAMARINDA

BANDA ACEH

MEDAN

PEKANBARU

JAMBI

PADANG

SUMATERA

BENGKULU

BANDAR LAMPUNG

PALEMBANG

BATAM

TIMOR

UJUNG PANDANG

NTT

KUPANG

NTB

DENPASAR

SURABAYA

SEMARANGBANDUNG

YOGYAKARTA

P. BALI MATARAM

JAWA

JAKARTA

AMBON

0o

Garis Khatulistiwa

MALAYSIA

SINGAPURA

BRUNEIDARUSSALAM

L A U T J A W A

L A U T N A T U N A

L A U T B A N D A

L A U T A R A F U R U

L A U T T I M O R

L A U T S E R A M

L A U T H A L M A H E R A

L A U T S U L A W E S I

L A U T S A W U

L A U T I N D O N E S I A

L A U T M A L U K U

L A U T F L O R E S

P. BANGKA

P. BELITUNG

P. FLORES

P. SUMBA

P. SUMBAWA

KEP. LETI

KEP. BABAR

KEP. TANIMBAR

P. BURU

P. YOS SUDARSO

P. HALMAHERA

KEP. SULA

KEP. SANGIHE

KEP. TALAUD

P. MADURA

KEP. BANYAK

KEP. MENTAWAI

KEP. RIAU

P. LOMBOK

S E L A T M A L A K A

S E L A

T K A

R I M

A T A

L A U

T M

A K

A S

S A

R

KEP. TOGIAN

KEP. BANGGAI

KEP. KAI

P. SERAM

KEP. ARU

Garis Khatulistiwa

Location of Greater Malang

KAB. JOMBANG

KAB. MOJOKERTO

KAB. SIDOARJO

KAB. KEDIRI

KOTA SURABAYA

KAB. BANGKALAN

KAB. GRESIKKAB. LAMONGAN

KAB. TUBAN

KAB. LUMAJANG

P.NUSABARUNG

P.PISANG

P.BANDUALIT

KAB. JEMBER

KAB. PAMEKASAN

KAB. SAMPANG

P.KAMBING

KAB. PASURUANKOTA. PROBOLINGGO

S E L A T M A D U R A

P.KETAPANG

KAB. BANYUWANGI

Tg.PERMISAN

KAB. SUMENEP

KAB. SITUBONDO

KAB. BONDOWOSO

P. KALONG

P.Iyang

P. PayunganP. Bulumanuk

P. Sapudi

P. Raas

P. Puteran

P. Genteng

P. Raja

P R O P I N S I

J A W A T E N G A H

TL. PACITAN

TL. PANGGUL

TL. PRIGI

TL. POPOH

TL SERANG

TL. DAMPAR

KAB. BLITAR

P.SEMPU

KAB. MALANG

KAB. BOJONEGORO

KAB. NGAWI

KAB. MADIUNKAB. MAGETAN

KAB. PONOROGO

KAB. NGANJUK

B A L I

P R O P I N S I

S A M U D E R A I N D O N E S I A

L A U T J A W A

KOTA. MOJOKERTO

KOTA. KEDIRI

KOTA. PASURUAN

KAB. PROBOLINGGO

KOTA. MALANGKOTA. BLITAR

KOTA. MADIUN

KAB. PACITANKAB. TRENGGALEK

KAB. TULUNGAGUNG

Area 353,065 Ha

Population

2,342,983

Land use is mainly

for Agriculture

purposes.

MALANG REGENCY

Kec. Singosari & Kec. Karangploso

Kec. Pakis

&Kec.Tumpang

Kec. Wagir

&Kec.Dau

Kec. Tajinan &Kec.Pakisaji

Area of 14,528 Ha

Population 753,422

Land use is mainly for

Business and Residential

purposes.

MALANG CITY

BATU CITY

Area 13,674 Ha.

Population182,392

Land use mainly for

Agriculture, Residential

and Recreational

purposes

Kec.Pacet, Kec.Mojokerto

Kec. Karangploso

Kec. Wagir

Kec. Pujon

THE MAIN STRENGTH OF THE

EXISTING PUBLIC TRANSPORT

• Clearly defined organizational structures

• Established regulatory framework which

can be developed

• Rules are reasonably well enforced by the

cooperatives

• Strong corporate image

• More supply of vehicles to meet future

possible increasing demand

SOME WEAKNESSES IN THE

EXISTING PUBLIC TRANSPORT

• Inefficient transit route structure

• Fragmentation of routes crossing city

boundary

• Lack of direct connections between

certain long-distance services

• System over-capacity

• Criminals inside transit minibus

U

LEGENDA

Batas Wilayah Studi

Batas ZonaPusat Zona

1000-2000 perjalanan orang/hari

>2000 perjalanan orang/hari

3

13

17

1627

8

30 4

25

7

18

26

10

26

23

39

24

15

9205

37

12

8 1

OD Pattern of Transit

Passenger in Greater Malang

Location of Terminal

There are 3 main bus terminal :

• Ajosari Terminal, Type A

• Hamid Rusdi Terminal, Type B

• Landungsari Terminal, Type B

There are 2 transit terminal :

•Mulyorejo Terminal

•Madyopuro Terminal

Number of Fleets

Malang City:

25 routes

2176 fleets

Malang Regency :

33 routes

854 fleets

Batu City :

9 routes

350 fleets

The Problem of Over-Supply

Three Main Issues Institutional Framework

Operating Systems and Procedures

Terminals and Route Network

Institutional Framework-1

Transit and rural transit operators are organized into route cooperatives, of which there is one for each route, but under the existing licensing system each minibus owner is regulated individually, leading to problems of enforcement and control

The route cooperatives perform various functions on behalf of their members, including liaison with government offices on various issues, and controlling entry to the industry through operating a “closed shop” system.

Institutional Framework-2

The grouping of operators into cooperatives on a route basis has certain advantages; they play a useful role in controlling the operations of their members.

However, the cooperatives are concerned only with the interests of their members, which do not always coincide with those of minibus passenger

There is some self-employed dispatchers at the terminals, while there are independent “regulators”, whose function is questionable, operating at some of the major stops on busy transit routes and terminals.

Independence regulator at minibus terminal

Institutional Framework-3

Most cooperatives would resist any proposed route changes, or the introduction of new routes, in case these affected the earnings of their members.

Most cooperatives are opposed to any increase in the number of vehicles licensed on their routes, since this would reduce the income of existing members

Most cooperatives are opposed to the concept of linking transit and rural transit routes, even though this would greatly improve the convenience of the service

Institutional Framework-4

The structure of the public transport industry is thus a contributory factor to some of the weaknesses of the system, and should be reformed in order to improve its effectiveness.

The role of the cooperatives may be strengthened in various ways. In particular, the task for regulating the operations of their members, instead of being performed by independent regulators and dispatchers.

There would also be advantages if the cooperatives, rather than individual vehicle owners, were to become the license holders for each route.

Institutional Framework-5

It is recommended that there will be separate licenses for vehicles and routes. Once this change has been effected, the cooperatives should hold the route licenses, but the vehicle owners should hold the vehicle licenses. This will enable owners to move from one cooperative to another if they so wish.

The existing organizational arrangements should be formalized by making the cooperatives fully responsible for all aspects of route operation, including dispatching vehicles from terminals and regulating the service along the route.

Operating System and Procedure-1

The “setoran” system is the method of payment where the driver shall pay some amounts of money to the owner of transit vehicle in daily basis.

This system is effective in ensuring that all fares are collected, and provides drivers with an incentive to work productively.

The system does have certain disadvantages, however, in that it encourages various malpractices by drivers in an attempt to maximize income

Operating System and Procedure-2

These include racing to pick up passengers, obstructing other vehicles, overcharging passengers, refusal to carry students at concessionary fares, and failing to operate the full route. The majority of drivers of normal-sized buses drive particularly dangerously, some of minibus driver do dangerously and there appears to be little enforcement on basic driving rules.

Accident of Transit Minibus

Operating System and Procedure-3

The principal alternative to the setoran system is the system which is practiced by most formal transport operators, whereby all revenue collected on the vehicles is paid by the conductor or driver to the operator; all expenses, including salaries for drivers and other staff, are then paid out of this revenue.

However, this system requires robust revenue control and inspection procedures

Operating System and Procedure-4

There are no formal scheduling procedures for urban minibus services and rural minibus services.

Vehicles are dispatched from terminals only when full, although some depart empty without waiting for a load or turn short of the terminal.

It is also common at stops where a large number of passengers embark and disembark, for vehicles to wait for a full load again before continuing the journey.

There is no provision for varying service frequencies at different points along a route to reflect varying demand.

Route ABG: Passenger Volume Distribution

Gadang - Arjosari

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

klent

eng

bold

i

j pah

law

anst

ka

bca

ram

pal

rs la

vale

t

simp k

aliu

rang

ps ta

wan

gman

gu

h ka

lpat

aru

kalp

atar

u

griya

shan

ta

ps b

limbin

g

bca

a ya

ni

rel k

a

simp r

inta

n

arjo

sari

No

. o

f P

sg.

Operating System and Procedure-8

A much simpler method is to dispatch vehicles at pre-determined intervals, for example, every five minutes between 0600 and 0830, every ten minutes until 1500, and every five minutes until 1700.

As well as varying between different times of the day and days of the week, the optimum frequency also varies between one part of a route and another.

This could be achieved by dividing a route into two or more overlapping routes, of different lengths; all routes would cover the sections of high demand, with only one or two of the routes operating as far as the outer terminals

Terminals and Route Network-1

First, the location should be at a point where routes should logically terminate, as determined by passenger demand patterns; if the terminal is used as an intermediate stopping point on routes passing through, it would be inconvenient for passengers.

Second, the size of the terminal should be calculated according to the number of arrivals and departures at the terminal: a critical figure is the maximum number of vehicles which will be at the terminal at any one time.

Terminals and Route Network-2

An efficient urban route network in an area of the size of Malang will inevitably have a large number of terminal points, not only at the ends of each route but at various points along certain routes where some vehicles may turn short.

At most terminals only minimal facilities will be required, principally passenger shelters.

To provide the best quality of service to passengers, bus terminals should be located near to points of heavy demand.

Conclusions

Urban transit services in developing countries such as Greater Malang in Indonesia could be improved by rationalizing the transit route structures.

The quality and efficiency of the services provided could be improved through better (1)institutional framework, (2) operating systems and procedure, and (3) terminals and route network.

All route licenses should be held by cooperatives instead of by the vehicle owners, although vehicle licenses should continue to be held by vehicle owners; this is a long term measure which will require legislative change.

Public Transport Competitor Mode is Motorcycle

Thank You

Thank You