Direct benefits of Cape Town’s MyCiTi early phase Bus Rapid Transit system are skewed in favour of middle rather than lower income residents. Credit: Gail Jennings/IPS

By Gail Jennings
CAPE TOWN, South Africa, Oct 2 2012 (IPS)

In South Africa, Bus Rapid Transit systems, which were pioneered to great effect in Latin American countries such as Colombia and Brazil, are being promoted as potentially effective ways of delivering improved public transport services to the urban poor. But experts question whether systems such as these can alleviate poverty to any meaningful extent.

Bus Rapid Transit, sometimes referred to as “rail on road” systems, are high-quality, high-capacity bus systems with their own right-of-way, dedicated bus lanes.

Today the TransMilenio in Bogota, Colombia carries around 1.6 million passengers every day, over 84 kilometres of segregated busway. In Curitiba, Brazil, about 70 percent of commuters use the BRT, and around 30 percent of passengers are “converted” private car users.

It is upon purportedly transformative systems such as these that the cities of Johannesburg, Tshwane and Cape Town in South Africa, Lagos in Nigeria and Nairobi in Kenya have pinned their transport hopes and dreams.

Early phases of multi-million dollar capital projects are operating in Johannesburg and Cape Town, and are set to soon launch in at least four other cities in South Africa.

But while it is too early to draw long-term conclusions about the impact of these transport systems, a number of researchers are asking questions and coming up with some answers about their ability to contribute to national goals of alleviating poverty.

James Chakwizira, a senior researcher in the built infrastructure department at the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), told IPS that although these high-quality services do have great potential for addressing public transport challenges within communities, the current initiatives such as Johannesburg’s three-year-old system, Rea Vaya, fall short of expectations.

He said because terminal infrastructure developments are located away from the marginal communities’ location, people from these areas need to use a minimum of two transport modes in order to access and use the routes.

Councilor Rehana Moosajee, who is on the Mayoral Committee Member for Transport for the City of Johannesburg, and is a Rea Vaya champion, told IPS that initially one of the key imperatives of the Rea Vaya system was to overcome apartheid’s spatial legacy and promote access and social cohesion.

“I think that now a lot more work will have to be done over a period of time in assessing impacts on poverty, as based on the city’s own multiple deprivation indices, the areas of highest multiple deprivation are further south of Soweto – a township to the south of Johannesburg – and therefore not yet reached by the service.

“Our own experience suggests that Rea Vaya commuters are certainly saving time, though, and we have also had some interesting accounts of property availability and take-up on certain parts of routes and the creation of economic activity,” she said.

At a December 2011 conference on Land Passenger Transport, Karen Lucas, an international researcher on transportation equity, supported the implementation of BRT to the extent that “these major infrastructure projects are needed to bring high quality, modern and efficient mainstream public transport services to inner cities.”

However, she noted “these services will serve only a minority of the travel needs of urban populations.”

Research released in July by the University of Pretoria’s Christo Venter and Eunice Vaz reached a similar conclusion. Using data from a small-sample household survey conducted in Soweto, they found that the time and cost benefits of the system “accrue largely to medium-income households rather than to the poorest commuters in the area.”

“To the extent that passengers can spend time and fare savings on other goods, Rea Vaya contributes to poverty reduction,” they found. The researchers also noted that Rea Vaya is priced higher than the cheapest available public transport alternative, commuter rail, which remains the mode of choice for the poorest commuters.

The average travel cost for Rea Vaya users comes to R10.20 (about 1.24 dollars) per one-way trip to work, as compared to R11.70 (about 1.42 dollars) for other modes of transport like mini-bus taxis, which most people used to take before Rea Vaya.

Overall, the direct benefits of Rea Vaya are skewed in favour of middle- rather than lower-income residents, the researchers concluded. They suggested that more specific targeting was needed for the BRT to deliver significant poverty reduction benefits.

The situation is similar with the City of Cape Town’s MyCiTi early phase BRT service.
African Centre of Excellence for Studies in Public and Non-motorised Transport (ACET) researchers Lorita Maunganidze and Romano Del Mistro used ACET Household Survey data to conclude that MyCiTi might not be of value to poor commuters.

“While poor commuters may benefit from more accessible, frequent and fast BRT services, ironically, these will be more expensive and in some cases unaffordable to them and therefore of no benefit,” the researchers said.

They recommend that the routing structure be revised and rationalised to make in-vehicle and trip distances shorter, particularly for the poor commuters who face the longest commuting distances and times; and that local BRT be tailored more specifically to work within the South African environment or under South African conditions.

Councilor Brett Herron, City of Cape Town’s Mayoral Committee Member for Transport, Roads and Stormwater, told IPS that it is not possible to look at the impact of a new BRT service on poverty, or on poor communities, in isolation from the entire public transport network.

“BRT is just one mode of transport and this mode alone cannot have expansive direct economic benefits to poor communities … BRT trunks alone are not going to bring about the level of change we require in order to universally benefit the urban poor.

“We will seriously address poverty only when we piece together all the complicated components of this puzzle; public transport is one piece – with changed land use, densification, transit-orientated development, all responding to new or improved public transport corridors, we will start to bring people to opportunities and take opportunities to people.”

Pauline Froschauer, project manager for Rustenburg Rapid Transport, which is currently in the construction phase, told IPS that instead of poverty alleviation, a transport project such as a BRT should be measured against what is usually its primary objective: the effect it has on levels of mobility and accessibility.

“At best one could say that by improving mobility and accessibility, there are positive ‘externalities’, such as city development, local economic development and poverty alleviation. But to try to measure this in one BRT corridor (such as the Soweto-CBD Rea Vaya) is, I think, misrepresentative. Until one has a reasonable network effect, improved mobility and accessibility will not be achieved.”

The road between Zimbabwe’s Victoria Falls and Livingstone, in Zambia, is a well-traversed one, criss-crossed by bicycle riders towing trailers of bread and other supplies, with their bicycle spokes reinforced to bear the extra weight.

“If you have a bicycle, you can be rich,” said one cargo cyclist on the road just beyond the falls, as he abandoned pedalling and pushed his wheeled load. “This is how we trade.”

Although they are low-tech, the trailers are skilfully designed and often neighbourhood- manufactured, have two wheels and are attached to the bicycle via a hitch behind the saddle. They can carry up to around 200 kilogrammes of goods, water or, less often, people. These are significantly greater weights than what can be transported by head load, handcart or backpack.

Zambulances – bicycle trailers with a mattress, privacy curtain and basic medical equipment – have replaced walking or being pushed in a wheelbarrow for many ailing rural people who live some distance from healthcare centres. Credit: Gail Jennings/IPS

In Zambia, Namibia and more recently Congo-Brazzaville, bicycle trailers save not only livelihoods, but also lives. Zambulances – bicycle trailers with a mattress, privacy curtain and basic medical equipment – have replaced walking or being pushed in a wheelbarrow for many ailing or pregnant rural people who live some distance from healthcare centres.

Designed and produced by Zambikes, the 2012 winner of the international MobiPrize for mobility-related social entrepreneurship, these trailers have been found to save one life for every nine days they are used.

South Africa has been slower than its neighbours to embrace the bicycle as an obvious example of low-cost, low-carbon mobility. But slowly micro-entrepreneurs and bicycle tourists are discovering the ease and economic opportunity a bicycle trailer can offer as a way of transporting goods and passengers.

Malibongwe* lives in Khayelitsha, a low-income neighbourhood on the outskirts of Cape Town, South Africa. He makes a living buying ice cream and selling it from his make-shift bicycle trailer – and manages to support his whole family. Recently he tested positive for HIV and now uses his bicycle to make the monthly trip to collect his anti-retroviral medication as well.

So it was with dismay that Malibongwe learned that his enterprise is in danger, from a surprising source. Despite the country’s draft non-motorised transport (NMT) policy that aims to increase the role of NMT as a key transport mode and allocate adequate and sustainable funding for its development and promotion, the South African National Department of Transport (NDoT) is considering prohibiting the use of bicycle trailers on public roads.

However, the department recognises that although there is growth in motorised transport in developing countries such as South Africa, a large portion of the population depends on non-motorised forms of transport. This is likely to not only continue, but increase following global trends of rising fuel prices and the need for low-carbon transportation.

“Local transport solutions such as trailers, handcarts or bicycles could assist poor and rural communities in making them more efficient with small business and domestic duties,” stated the draft NMT Policy.

It also noted that the “effects of inefficient transport systems in rural parts of Africa, which rely on non-motorised transport in its most basic form, are manifested in a lack of market integration, poor provision of education and health services, low productivity and low rates of regional and local economic activity.”

Yet in June, the NDoT published an intention to amend the National Road Traffic Regulations, proposing that “no person shall ride a pedal cycle on a public road drawing or towing a trailer or anything.”

Malibongwe told IPS that he is “very worried about the new law, as if it is passed I’ll have no way of supporting my family.” He is one of a number of bicycle riders who petitioned the NDoT in July, asking that the proposal be reconsidered.

Kyle Mason-Jones, a chemical engineer whose work focuses on carbon emissions reduction, and who also bicycle commutes 15 kilometres most days in Cape Town, is another.

“By limiting the ability of bicycles to carry goods and passengers, this regulation will undermine their potential as a primary mode of transport for individuals and for most entrepreneurial small businesses,” he told IPS.

“For the poor, this will destroy a very promising possibility for affordable transport and wipe out many small business opportunities. For wealthier citizens, it will make the ownership of a motorcar a necessity of life, eliminating many of the benefits of bicycle-centred transport.”

Concerns about road safety were among the reasons behind the proposed amendments, said one of the policy-makers working with the NDoT. “We know that we have a poor safety record – almost half of the deaths on our roads are pedestrians and cyclists,” he told IPS, asking for anonymity.

South Africa has one of the highest road death tolls in the world. During the holiday period from Dec. 1, 2011 to Jan. 10, 2012, 1,475 people were killed in road accidents according to the NDoT. This contrasts sharply with the United Kingdom, for example, where the death toll for all of 2010 was 1,857.

“Road safety activists brought to our attention that in mostly rural areas, people were being carried by these trailers, and we had a concern about the speed of downhill transportation,” the source said.

Safety-conscious countries such as Germany and the UK – where bicycle trailers are popular modes for parents transporting young children, and for long-distance bicycle tourists – strictly regulate bicycle trailers as merely one facet of comprehensive attention to safer road behaviour.

In Germany, bicycle trailer loads (goods and people) may not exceed 250 kg, or 100 kg in a rigid coupling with no independent brakes, and 60 kg if the trailer itself has no brakes and has a flexible coupling.

Trailers must be less than 80 centimetres wide. In the UK, all wheeled vehicles designed for transport must comply with British or European safety standards – the equivalent of the rules and regulations issued by South Africa’s Bureau of Standards. Certain visibility precautions must be taken, such as reflectors, lights and pennants.

In South Africa, current legislation forbids bicycles from towing other vehicles, but does not define bicycle trailers as vehicles. Instead, trailers were broadly defined as a vehicle towed by a car. The country’s Vehicle Technical Committee, in reviewing these regulations in 2011 and 2012, determined to prohibit bicycle trailers rather than regulate or define them.

The new, prohibitive measures seem counter-productive in a middle-income country with high levels of poverty, where the overwhelming majority of people rely on non-motorised transport.

Improving the goods and passenger carrying of non-motorised transport vehicles will not only facilitate the fulfilment of any government’s transportation goals, but also its goals for job creation, micro-enterprise and community sustainability, suggested NMT engineer and safe cycling educator Louis de Waal.

There is no doubt that road danger is a major fear for people who walk and cycle in South Africa, De Waal told IPS. In addition to the ill-disciplined behaviour of road users, the road environment itself is often not conducive to keeping pedestrians and cyclists safe.

“But to ban one form of bicycle transport, ahead of implementing other safety regulations such as mandatory 1.5 metre passing distances, slower road speeds and compulsory bicycle reflectors, just does not make enough sense,” he said.

Citizen action and the resulting correspondence to the NDoT might have made an impact, though.

“Now that we have seen people’s objections, and read their reasoning, we agree that we will have a significant impact on entrepreneurs and small businesses, and livelihoods of people, with this possible regulation. So we will be back at the drawing board,” said the source at the NDoT.

This is good news, of course, said Malibongwe. But he raised a new concern. Unaccustomed to reading South Africa’s government gazette, blogs or social media, he was not on the “public engagement” radar; he found out about the proposed amendments only because a vigilant activist was looking for interviewees. How will he know of the outcome, he asked?

*Name withheld on request.

“Politicians may tell us that bicycles are a sign that we are not advancing,” says Patrick Kayemba, managing director of the First African Bicycle Information Organization in Uganda, “but we ourselves have seen that cycling is a socio-economic tool. It works now – we don’t have to wait for someone to rescue us with better public transport, better this, or better that…”

Repairing bicycles in Rundu, Namibia. Credit: Gail Jennings/IPS

“A bicycle in Africa means access,” Kayemba told an international cycling planning conference audience in Seville, Spain in March 2011. “You have a bicycle, you have access to income, clean water, social services, different places of work, a means to carry goods,” he said. “It is not for leisure, it is not for reducing weight – here, a bike is life.”

Bicycles are expensive commodities, however, so Kayemba’s organisation operates a bicycle micro-credit scheme in Uganda as well as a bicycle boda boda savings scheme. (Boda boda also refers to motorcycle taxis – but enterprising Ugandans also use pedal-powered two-wheelers, with a pillow on the carrier for the passenger’s comfort.)

“It is usual for boda bodas not to be owned by the drivers,” says Kayemba, “and they have to give more than a quarter of their earnings to the owner. This means a struggle with long hours to make a living – but our savings scheme helps drivers lose their dependence on the owner.”

Like Ugandans, most Namibian cyclists also rely on affordable, refurbished second-hand bicycles, donated by international agencies and distributed via local organisations.

Before the advent of the BEC network (advancing steadily since 2006), there were only two reasonably well-stocked bicycle shops in Namibia, says Michael Linke. Of course this made cycling, and its associated benefits, somewhat inaccessible.

Cycling changing lives

Linke tells the story of Isabella Thipungu, who lives in her family’s village, eight kilometres from the town of Divundu in Namibia’s Kavango region. Because of the distance, she used to live in the school hostel in Divundu, and only saw her family on weekends. Since she bought a bike at Makveto Bicycle shop, a BEC near her home, she has moved back to her family home and commutes every day in a fraction of the time it would take to walk. Before Makveto started, Isabella’s nearest bike shop was 250 km away, says Linke.

There’s no doubt that for utility cyclists in much of Africa (people who cycle as a means of transport), cycling is not a step backward but a step forward. And as Gil Penalosa, international liveable cities consultant, points out, Copenhagen and Amsterdam are among the wealthiest cities in the world, and they have the highest urban cycling rates. In these cities, bicycle transport has neither “loser” nor “elite” status; it’s simply the cheapest and most convenient way in which to get around.

As Cape Town commuter Edward Zozi explains, he rides because “I save a lot of money. Five hundred rand per month (80 dollars). Before, I used a (minibus) taxi… each and every day. Now I’m saving all that.”

Commuter William Jim, in his 50s, has been riding bicycles for “maybe five years,” he says. “Before that I was using taxis. But the taxis were too expensive…”

Similar success stories can be found in Malawi, Zambia, Ghana, Kenya, Tanzania, Botswana and Zimbabwe: bicycles have an immediate cost-saving, life-enhancing and poverty-reducing impact on the lives of everyone who rides them.

Improving access

There are also shared challenges. The roads are dangerous, authorities don’t take the needs of bicycle commuters into account, and new bicycles are priced beyond the pocket of those who need them.

“More people want to ride, but without more bicycles, and the right bicycles, it’s difficult,” Kayemba told Velo-City Sevilla delegates in March. “We need new technologies, durable, heavy-duty bikes. And we need fashionable bicycles also to come to Africa, not only the ones people don’t want anymore.”

His words fell on receptive ears – those of bicycle component manufacturing giant Shimano, at the conference in search of new markets in Africa. And so it was that March 2011 saw the launch of the African Agenda for Bicycles, a task team of civil society organisations and individuals from more than 15 sub-Saharan countries, and Shimano, with one goal: to reduce the price of new bicycles in Africa. This they plan to do by advocating the slashing of import duties and taxes on bicycle components, and by setting up local bicycle assembly plants.

“This would create a create a healthy bicycle market in Africa that would provide numerous benefits to people, businesses and governments.”

“I don’t know why it has taken us so long,” says Kayemba. And all that remains is for governments to see that bicycle transport isn’t just ‘while we wait for enough money to buy a car to take the bus’. Bicycles are for now. For good.”