Sustainable Urban Public Transport Planning in Indonesia, Case Studies in Yogyakarta and Jakarta

Sustainable Urban Public Transport Planning in Indonesia,
Case Studies in Yogyakarta and Jakarta
Background
Traffic congestion has existed since many years ago and continually remains a major problem in most cities all over the world, especially in the urban areas of developing regions. Congestion occurs when the number of vehicles using on the road is larger than the capacity of the available road space, hindering the efficient traffic situation (Dr Peter Frost, 17 April 2013). Traffic represents the sign of a dynamic economy. However, excessive congestion leads to a lot of unexpected consequences comprising environment pollution, more fuel wastage and increased monetary losses, such as more costs to the community because of longer, less predictable travel time, additional vehicles costs, heavily pollution by increased usage of low-grade fuel because of more vehicles running on the road.
Traffic congestion is highlight problem on the agenda of urban issues. The problem is not only a matter of traffic congestion but also a regional planning. Due to serious consequences of traffic congestion, this issue should be resolved as soon as possible. However, road constructions including road widening and new road building are very difficult and unrealistic in urban areas. Experience has shown that increasing capacity of the road network is only a temporary approach. It is because that government builds more commercial for developing. Consequently, traffic congestion occurs after a few years. According to the actual situation and the long-term considerations, by reforming public transport to be a sustainable urban public transport system is a worth considering solution.
Introduction

This paper is structured as follows. In the next section, the goal of the public transport system in Indonesia cities and the users of this system are introduced. Both the goal and users of this system analysis are based on the description and data providing in the case study.

Goals
Public transport provides a range of goals including economic, environmental and social purposes (Veeneman, 2002). Therefore, reforming a public transport system can reach some expected goals and bring a plenty of advantages for some urban areas of developing regions.
In this case study, reforming a public transport system also reaches some desirable goals for some cities in Indonesia. The first goal is improving the quality of public transport to encourage and attract more people to use it. Generally, the comfort and quality of existing public transport fleet is poor, and a lot of vehicles are dilapidated and dirty. This situation has led to an undesirable consequence. People who can afford to pay to travel prefer to use their own vehicles or by taxi than use buses. Furthermore, most people have no temptation to use buses. Thus, high quality of public transport system is the most important goal.
Besides that, the second goal is easing traffic congestion by increasing the capacity of most public transport vehicles. It is obvious that the capacity of most transport vehicles is low and the size is small in Indonesia cities. In order to ease traffic congestion, using many fewer, but much larger buses is better.
Additional, reducing environment pollution is also an important goal. More public transport using helps promote cleaner air with reducing the usage of automobile. For each passenger mile, the emissions of transit vehicles are fewer than private automobile emissions (M.J. Bradley & Associates, May 2007). Therefore, it’s clearly that using public transport can improve air quality resulting in enhancing the reputation of Indonesia big cities. The last but not the least, saving money is another goal which is an expected one to reach. It is easily to see that recently Indonesia has suffered from financial and monetary crisis. Fare increases are the most possible solution to ease this situation.
In a short, in order to maintain sustainable public transport developing, it is important that public transport should offer a range of choice and quality to meet most citizens’ requirements and increase users’ satisfactory.

Users
As we know, the most important purpose of reforming public transport system is to meet users’ expected requirements. Users’ experiences are very valuable for reforming a sustainable public transport system. The management can collect feedback from users for improvement. Furthermore, passengers are regarded as drivers of innovation in public transport planning and passengers’ participation is also important factor (). As far as concerned, analysis of users in public transport is necessary for reforming. Users consist of public transport users and non public transport users. The results of interview surveys have been reported in the case study. The number of respondents was 300 who were public transport users and non public transport users.
There are four kinds of journey purpose. They are to work, to school, to visit relatives and other purposes.
For public transport users, the major purpose is to school or university. The result is shown in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1 Journey purpose for public transport users
For public transport users, they have many reasons using public transport. Most of them use public transport because they have no private vehicles. The result is shown in Fig. 2.

Fig.2 Reasons using public transport
For non public transport users, the journey purpose also can be divided into same categories and the result is shown in Fig. 3.

Fig. 3 Journey purpose for non public transport users
For non public transport users, most of them prefer to use private vehicles. They think private vehicles are more flexible, faster, cheaper, more efficient and more comfortable. The result is shown in Fig. 4.

Fig. 4 Reasons for using private vehicles
On the other hand, for non public transport users, the most important reason why they do not use the public transport is too slow. Other reasons are safety, no time table, low bus quality, security and so on.
Besides that, most of both public transport users and non public transport users agree that the quality of public transport should be increased, although they have to pay more. Furthermore, if public transport quality is increased and better than now, non public transport users will try to use public transport. However, the quality of public transport should reach the standard what they need. Thus, analysis of users is an important role for reforming public transport system.
Stakeholders
The word ‘stakeholder’ has been popular in public and nonprofit management theory and practice in the last 20years, particularly, in the last decade. Stakeholder analysis originated from the business sciences and it has evolved into a field that includes economics, political science, game, decision theory and environmental sciences now ().
Stakeholder refers to a person, group, organization and member of system who can affect or are affected by an organization’s actions, i.e., that in which they have a stake. R. Edward Freeman, in the now classic text Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach defined a stakeholder as ‘any group or individual who can affect or is affected by the achievement of the organization’s objectives’ (John M. Bryson).
Undoubtedly, stakeholder analysis has always been important and it is more important than ever now. It is because that the increasingly interconnected nature of the world (). It is obvious that any public problem which are balancing budgets, reforming state pensions, interpreting and implementing health reform, redesigning higher education, improving public safety and maintaining transportation and infrastructure. As we know, all of these problems involve into a plenty of people, groups and organizations.
Besides that, stakeholder analysis draws out the interests of stakeholders relating to the problems which the case study is and helps identify relationships between different stakeholders to help possible coalition.
In this case study, there are six potential stakeholders: DISHUB, ORGANDA, route association leaders, cooperatives, bus companies and public users. Stakeholder analysis is shown as follows:
DISHUB means road transport and traffic unit. It includes provincial and municipal DISHUBs. They largely protect the interests of the bus companies and route associations. Therefore, they are not consistent with national or municipal public transport policy. Route association leaders monitor the existing routes and planning of routes. Bus route developing relies strongly on the route association leaders. Cooperatives have route monopolies and are able to mobilize large groups to resist any development in urban transport if they realize that it’s against their interests. Bus companies have right to manage all of the bus in urban transport including the buses renewing. Public users are the direct beneficiaries. Management can get feedback from public users for improvement.

Power versus interest grid is shown in Fig. 5.High Interest | Public users | Low
Cooperatives | |
High
Low

Power

Fig. 5 Power versus interest grid
Problem and Causes
Overview the case study, there are a plenty of possible problems of public transport system in Indonesia cities. The public transport systems do not reach the requirements of public users. Most citizens in Indonesia cities prefer to use private vehicles. It is clear to see that most of the passengers are students and school children. They are no choice, because they do not have any private vehicles. They are captive passengers. These systems are not attractive for other people, especially workers who tend to use private vehicles.
In Jakarta, public transit trips are mostly by bus. However, commuter rail system is limited. Although, many studies and plans have been developed for Jakarta public transport system in the past several decades, none of these systems have been implemented. Due to the economic crisis and the transition to democracy, some policies have been changed. These changes increased the difficulty of communication between every government department and some other problems. Trans Jakarta bus way has been decided to develop in Jakarta. Although, this system spends less expense than metro and provide the citizens a fast public transportation system to reduce rush hour traffic, there are still some problems with traffic congestion for private vehicles because of the lane reduction.
In Yogyakarta, the demand of routes decreased sharply. Most of passengers are students and school children. Moreover, the fare is flat. There is only single trip ticketing system. It does not offer other kinds of tickets, such as weekly or monthly tickets. Furthermore, the cooperatives have route monopolies. They are able to mobilize large groups to resist any development in urban transport if they think it is against their interests. This situation strongly limits the development of public transport system.
In a short, the public transport system has a major problem in Indonesia cities. It is low quality of public transport system.
Root Cause Analysis (RCA) is a method that is used to address a problem or non-conformance, on order to get to the “root cause” of the problem (Geoff Vorley, 2008). RCA can be regarded as long-term solutions to problems. Many organizations always find short-term solutions responding to problems. For example, in order to solve the financial crisis, the government defers maintenance, cannibalizes fleets, reduces service frequencies and holds down fares. But all of these solutions may be short-term ones. However, staff needs to repeat the same tasks over and over again according to quick fixes solutions.
To improve efficiency and profitability, organizations should look under the surface to the root of a problem or issue (Geoff Vorley, 2008). By eliminating the cause of a problem, organizations can save money and time. Thus, RCA is necessary for finding solutions.
The analysis causes is shown as follows:
Overview the case study, the problem which is low quality of public transport system in Indonesia cities has six root causes. They are management, people, environment, technologies, equipment and procedures. The link of problem and root causes is shown in Fig. 6.
Management

Environment

Low quality of public transport system
People

Technologies

Equipment

Procedures

Fig. 6 The link of problem and root causes
In order to determine the risks of the causes and sub-causes of effects, organizations often use Fishbone diagram. Of course, cause and effect are same things. It can clearly show the causes and sub-causes.
The Fishbone diagram is an analysis tool that provides a comprehensive way to look at effects and the causes which can create or contribute to those effects. Due to the function of the Fishbone diagram, it may be referred to as a cause-and-effect diagram (Watson, 2004). * Fishbone
Environment
People

Low service
Existing regulatory policies and operational practices
Management

Lane reduction
Shelters control
Device control
Training

Fig. 6 Low quality of transport system Fishbone diagram
Service limitation
DISHUB monitor
Bus route plan
Financial crisis
Calo activities
Sign of stops
Link of every government department
No implementation of planned system
Limited rail system
Culture limitation
Flat fare
High bus frequencies
Trip ticketing system
Bus control
Users
Cooperatives
Vested interests affect
Drivers
Route association leaders
Operators
Level of products
Technology
Equipment
Procedure
Cost of device
Bus route development
No systematic network planning process
Weather
Bus floor
Dilapidated and dirty
Less comfort
Low effective capacity
Security
Transition to democracy
Economic crisis
Consensus culture
Hazardous lanes
Low quality of public transport system