1. Urban Transport in India:
Beyond the Nano and Metro …
and Back to the Basics
Madhav G. Badami
McGill University
Indian Institute of Technology, Madras
February 13, 2008
mgb-eat2
2. Outline
• The Problem -- Rapid motor vehicle
growth and impacts
• UT in India – Prospects, Characteristics
and Considerations
• Getting from Here to There – what WILL
and WILL NOT work … and WHY
• Some Questions for Thought and Debate
mgb-eat2
3. The Problem -- Rapid motor
vehicle growth and impacts
mgb-eat2
4. Motor Vehicle Growth in India, 1971-2001
Others Goods Cars, Jeeps, Taxis M2W Vehicles
60
Rapid growth nationally
50
M2W vehicles predominate, but …
Million vehicles
40
30
20
10
0
1971 1981 1991 2001
Source: MORTH, 2004.
mgb-eat2
6. Motor Vehicle Activity -- Impacts
• Mobility for millions; employment; technological
know-how and skills
• Serious local impacts
– Road safety, access and mobility for urban
poor and NMT
– Air pollution, noise, congestion, transport
wastes
– PRIORITIZING IMPACTS
• Regional and global impacts
– Acidification, ozone, ABC
– Climate change
– Energy security
mgb-eat2
7. Road Safety
• Rising trends -- India vs. USA
• Pedestrians and cyclists worst affected
• Traffic injuries – life years lost
Victim (%) Impacting Vehicle (%)
Pedestrian/ Single
63 6
Cycle vehicle
M2W 27 M2W 5
M3W 2 M3W 1
Car 3 Car 23
Bus/Truck 5 Bus/Truck 65
Delhi Traffic Police (2004), courtesy Kavi Bhalla mgb-eat2
8. PM-10
Daily limit exceeded most days every year
mgb-eat2
Courtesy Milind Kandlikar
10. Global Energy Consumption
by Sector, 1971-2001
Industry Road Transport Residential Other
8000
Energy growth most rapid in road transport until recently
6000
M TOE
4000
2000
0
1971 1981 1991 2001
Road transport 80% of total transport Source: IEA, 2006
mgb-eat2
11. Global Petroleum Consumption
by Sector, 1971-2001
Industry Road Transport Other
4000
3000
M TOE
2000
1000
0
1971 1981 1991 2001
Source: IEA, 2006
mgb-eat2
12. Road Transport Energy Consumption by Region, 1971-2001
OECD-NA Other OECD Asia ROW
Source: IEA (2006)
1,600
All OECD – 70%; North America – 40%
1,200
M TO E
800
400
0
1971 1981 1991 2001
mgb-eat2
13. UT in India – Prospects,
Characteristics and
Considerations
mgb-eat2
14. Rapid Urbanization
1950 (1) 1975 (5; 1 Asian LIC) 2000 (16; 8 Asian LIC, 2015 (21; 10 Asian LIC,
3 Indian) 3 Indian)
New York 12.3 Tokyo 19.7 Tokyo 26.4 Tokyo 27.2
New York 15.9 Mexico City 18.1 Dhaka 22.8
Shanghai 11.4 Sao Paulo 17.9 Bombay 22.6
Mexico City 10.7 New York 16.7 Sao Paulo 21.2
Sao Paulo 10.3 Bombay 16.1 Delhi 20.9
Mexico City 20.4
Los Angeles 13.2
New York 17.9
Calcutta 13.1 Jakarta 17.3
Shanghai 12.9 Calcutta 16.7
Dhaka 12.5 Karachi 16.2
Delhi 12.4 Lagos 16.0
Buenos Aires 12.0 Los Angeles 14.5
Jakarta 11.0 Shanghai 13.6
Osaka 11.0 Buenos Aires 13.2
Beijing 10.8 Metro Manila 12.6
Rio de Janeiro 10.7 Beijing 11.7
Karachi 10.0 Rio de Janeiro 11.5
Cairo 11.5
Istanbul 11.4
Osaka 11.0
Tianjin 10.3
Rapid urbanization; mega-cities; rapidly growing medium-sized cities
Rapid urbanization; mega-cities; rapidly growing medium-sized cities
In 2015, Asia will likely have 160 cities with >1 m. population (30% in India)
In 2015, Asia will likely have 160 cities with >1 m. population (30% in India)
mgb-eat2
Source: UN (1999; 2002; 2003)
Source: UN (1999; 2002; 2003)
15. Rapidly Growing Motor Vehicle Ownership and Use
• Rapid urbanization, growing incomes, growing supply, easy credit
• “Buying a dream” – advertising (PHOTO)
• Changing family structure and gender relations
• Ownership per capita much lower than in OECD, but much higher than at
similar per capita incomes (M2W vehicles); now Nano
• Advantages of MVs, low cost of MV use (M2W vehicle), but also force of
circumstance
– People forced to live afar, priced out of land market
– Poor public transit
– Congestion, compromised access and safety
– Planning for motor vehicles, neglect of NMV
• People forced to buy and use personal MVs; Social trap
• Growth rates of M2W vs Cars vs Public transit
mgb-eat2
17. At the Same Time … Poverty … and
High PT and NMT Use
• Growing incomes but also low affordability and high levels
of urban poverty
• Rapid urbanization – growing incomes – rapid motorization
-- mass poverty -- low motor vehicle ownership rates --
important consequences for Urban transport Outcomes
• Land use – high densities, mixed use
• Distribution of trips by purpose, distance (CHARTS)
• High PT and NMT shares (CHARTS)
mgb-eat2
18. Distribution of Trips by Purpose in Delhi
Education
Work
Business
Shopping
Other
0 10 20 30 40 50
% Share of trips
Source: RITES/ORG 1994 mgb-eat2
19. Distribution of Trips by Distance in Delhi
Work Education All
100
Cumulative % of trips
80
60
Mean Trip Lengths
40 Education 3.3 km
Work 9.7 km
20 All trips 6.8 km
0
< 2.5 <5 < 10 < 15 < 20 < 25 > 25
Distance, km
Source: RITES/ORG, 1994
mgb-eat2
20. Mode Shares in Delhi
Bus
Walk
M2W
Car+Jeep+Van
Bicycle
Rickshaw
M3W
0 10 20 30 40 50
% Share
Source: RITES/ORG, 1994.
mgb-eat2
22. Mode Shares – India vs. NA
Car/ Transit Cycle Walk Other
M2W
Delhi/ 15 35 3 43 4
Mumbai
Canada 74 14 1 10 1
USA 84 3 1 9 2
mgb-eat2
23. Urban Transport Impacts
• High levels of impacts despite low MV and high PT and
NMT mode shares
• Large exposures and high levels of poverty
– Serious health and welfare effects; poverty-impact
synergies
– Air pollution, road safety, access and mobility
• Costs, benefits unevenly distributed -- poor benefit little
from but disproportionately affected by motorization and
planning
mgb-eat2
24. Urban Transport Impacts
• Proximate causes technological, but underlying
behavioural, institutional factors
– Fuel/oil adulteration; Poor maintenance; Fuel and
spares pricing
• Inadequate physical infrastructure
• Inadequate resources for policy-making, regulation,
monitoring, enforcement
– Road rules; parking; I/M; fuel adulteration
• Inadequate resources, capabilities and governance ???
mgb-eat2
25. Policy-making -- Factors
• Diverse groups, conflicting objectives, differentially
affected
• Rapid motorization … but also low affordability, high PT,
NMV shares
• Traffic conditions – high density, mixed modes and uses --
effects on NMV, PT, MV
• Land use – pros and cons; inability to regulate
• Medium sized towns and cities -- challenges
mgb-eat2
26. Getting from Here to There –
what WILL and WILL NOT work …
and WHY
mgb-eat2
27. Urban Transport – A Major Public Concern
• Intense frustration, yet resignation
• Sense of inevitability
• Need to provide more roads for cars
• Provide everyone a car (Nano)
• Faith in technological solutions – Emission
standards, Flyovers, Metro
mgb-eat2
28. Conventional UT Planning – Tightening Belts as a
Cure for Obesity …
• Inevitability presumed -- Status-quo accommodating
• Motor vehicle centred -- high value to time savings in MVs
• Narrowly focused – issues, time-frame
• “Building our way out of it” has not worked even in resource-rich
contexts – US example
• Motor vehicles become self-perpetuating
• Technological solutions futile -- vicious circle of motorization and
impacts – Jaime Lerner
• UT Planning is self-fulfilling, reinforcing – IATROGENIC -- Illich
• In Indian context, not only infeasible, but highly undesirable --
severe access loss, displacement and social disruption -- Illich
mgb-eat2
29. Metro Systems in LICs –
Triumph of Hope over Experience …
• Very high capital and operating costs, disruptive, long lead times
• Restricted resources necessitate constrained network in rapidly growing
urban regions with no strong centres
• Low potential for capture beyond access distances of 500 metres; Highly
compromised access exacerbates situation
• Trip characteristics – lengths (CHART); trip chaining
• Egress times; Connectivity at trip end …
• High fares required for viability, but low affordability, discretionary travel
• Low costs, advantages of MV use (fuel, parking)
• Low ridership, little effect on congestion, at very high cost – subsidizing
the well-to-do at the expense of low-income groups
• Even in HIC’s – Flyvbjerg et al
mgb-eat2
31. MOTORIZATION IS NOT INEVITABLE
Policy Does Matter …
Car Transit Cycle Walk Other
Canada 74 14 1 10 1
USA 84 3 1 9 2
Netherlands 44 8 27 19 1
Sweden 36 11 10 39 4
mgb-eat2
32. In India – Cut Our UT Coat According to Our Cloth
• Inadequate resources, capabilities and
governance … OR misguided priorities
• Urban Transport Objectives
– Cost-effectiveness
– Safety
– Equity
– Resource use
– Environmental impact
– Well-being – Livability; livelihoods
– Reliability, vulnerability to disruptions
• Synergies; multiple groups, differentially affected
mgb-eat2
33. Accessibility for All is the Key
• Not MOBILITY, or ACCESS TO MOBILITY, but ACCESSIBILITY FOR
ALL
• Problem avoidance, not end-of-pipeline cure (CHARTS)
• Equity, efficient traffic, transit viability, multiple objectives
• Public transit – Importance of buses; small and medium sized
cities; BRT (CHART)
• Curb personal MV activity
– Need to internalize Costs
– Role of variable costs in behaviour – parking control
• Strategic phasing of policies
• Land use crucially important – CHARTS
• WE HAVE A STARK CHOICE – THE TIME IS NOW
mgb-eat2
34. Door-to-Door Journey Times, Delhi
120
J o u r n e y tim e , m in u te s
100
80 Cycle
M2W
60
Car
40 Bus
20
0
2.5 3.8 6.3 8.8 11.3 13.8 16.3 18.8 21.3 23.8 25
Distance, km
mgb-eat2
35. Trips by Distance, Delhi, 1994
100
C u m u la t iv e % o f t rip s
80
60 Work trips
M2W trips
40 All trips
20
0
<2.5 <5 < 10 < 15 < 20 < 25 > 25
Distance, km
mgb-eat2
36. BRT vs. Urban Rail
mgb-eat2
Courtesy Aurora Fe Ables et al
37. BRT vs. Urban Rail
mgb-eat2
Courtesy Aurora Fe Ables et al
38. Land Use is Critical
Courtesy Alain Bertaud mgb-eat2
39. Land Use is Critical
Courtesy Alain Bertaud mgb-eat2
42. Global Petroleum and Natural Gas Consumption
by Sector, 1971-2001
Industry Road Transport Residential Other
5000
Energy growth most rapid in transport until recently
4000
3000
M TO E
2000
1000
0
1971 1981 1991 2001
mgb-eat2
Road transport 80% of total transport Source: IEA (2004)
43. Mode Shares in Montreal
AM Peak % 24-hr %
Other
Walk AM Peak PT Shares
Bus 11.5%
Bicycle Metro 7%
School Bus Train 0.4%
Public Transit
Car/LTV
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
% Share
mgb-eat2
