The importance of institutional arrangements for a ...constraints and obstacles to project...
Transcript of The importance of institutional arrangements for a ...constraints and obstacles to project...
The importance of institutional
arrangements for a successful
transport and urban planning
CODATU XV Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Jose Enrique Pérez Fiaño
October 2012
2 The role of public transport prioritization in (re)shaping cities
Table of Contents Introduction: initial thoughts on BRT
implementation needs
The public agencies framework: discussion
of alternative models
Public Private partnership opportunities in
BRTs
Conclusions
3 The role of public transport prioritization in (re)shaping cities
Lower
service
quality
The growing success of BRT systems is due to its proven ability to break
the vicious circle that leads to degradation of the urban transport
The progressive weakening of transportation systems is caused by the weakness of the operators and
public agencies responsible for guiding and regulating the operation. Users end up paying the inefficiency of
the system with higher fares
Declining Quality Spiral Lower
service
quality
Car
ownership
increasing
Increase in
traffic
congestion
Buses stuck
in traffic
Decrease
in bus
investment
Poor
financial
viability
Higher in
business
risk
4 The role of public transport prioritization in (re)shaping cities
Key elements for a successful BRT implementation
Operational
performance
Fleet quality
Engineering
design
TICs, control
tools
Institutional
arrangements
The availability of a fleet of new high-capacity buses, comfortable, and
equipped with safety features, is the main distinguishing element of a
BRT System
An efficient operation of the bus fleet is the main reason for the
implementation of a mass transit system with fixed stops, regular
frequencies and sufficient service capacity
The provision of adequate technological systems for fare collection,
ticketing, fleet positioning control, incident response and security issues,
are key to guarantee the BRT efficiency and public image
A substantial part of inefficiencies, unnecessary costs and functional
problems in mass transit systems, can be avoided with a proper design
of the corridor facilities
Efficiency and profitability of the BRT system depends, ultimately,
in a stable framework of institutional arrangements, that should be
accepted by all the public and private stakeholders
5 The role of public transport prioritization in (re)shaping cities
Elements of the institutional arrangements framework
INSTITUTIONAL IMPLICATIONS
Several projects can coincide and progress at the same time for the implementation of BRT corridors, MRT, or metro lines . Each system is usually operated or managed by a different agency
The proposal of new transport modes has technological, operational and business model implications that require responsive and specialised management that can avoid bureaucratic delays
The desire to incorporate the private sector into the operation and financing of new transport systems implies the need for clear rules on access to and presence in the market and transparent management of the fare revenue
• It is essential that there will be a
Transport Authority provided with the
powers for planning, control and
coordination of the different transport
systems. The Transport Authority shoud
act as a single coordinating agency
• The planning, control and management
of different systems implies the
creation of public agencies with the
capacity for flexible management and
specific knowledge of each business.
• The public sector (authority and public
management companies) must maintain
the functions of control, regulation,
planning and award of contracts and
operating licenses, and the construction
of the overall system infrastructure and
that for each specific mode.
EVOLVING ACTIONS
Definition of
ownership and
maintenance of buses
and infrastructure
Definition of the
coordination
mechanisms
Definition of roles and
responsibilities of the
agents
INSTITUTIONAL ACTIONS
The initiatives to modernise public transport system require concurrent action on a new institutional framework
6 The role of public transport prioritization in (re)shaping cities
BRT projects involve a large number of stakeholders
Typical structure of stakeholders in BRT projects
Private
Sector
Current
operator
Informal
vendors
Civil
Organiza
tion
Real
State
agencies
National Level
Ministry of
Transportation
(Communications)
Ministry of
Home Affairs
Ministry of
Planning
Ministry of
Finance Ministry of
Economy
Ministry of
Environment
Presidency
Current
operator
Municipal Level
Informal
vendors
Civil
organizations
Real State
Agencies
Railroads
authorities
Road
Authorities
Policy
department
Universities
Cooperation
agencies
International
entities
Banks
7 The role of public transport prioritization in (re)shaping cities
The path to succeed is a clear definition of the three institutional levels:
policy-making, regulation and operation, within the institutional framework
Leaving the institutional issues unaddressed most likely might result in unresolved constraints and
obstacles to project implementation, thus reducing the effectiveness of the envisaged solutions to
integrate urban and transport planning
Level of
Government
Participation of private sector
POLICY
REGULATORY
OPERATION
National
Local
Decision drivers
8 The role of public transport prioritization in (re)shaping cities
Table of Contents Introduction: initial thoughts on BRT
implementation needs
The public agencies framework: discussion
of alternative models
Public Private partnership opportunities in
BRTs
Conclusions
9 The role of public transport prioritization in (re)shaping cities
In the case of the Public Sector the institutional arrangements may include
a variety of formats
Level of
Government
National
Local
Type of institution Description
A transport
department
A transport authority
A public company
A specialised transport
agency
A non - governmental
organisation
• Large entity with a wide range of regulatory and management
responsibilities; typically reports directly to city political officials
• Organisation with wide oversight on all public transport activities;
frequently given autonomous status through a board of directors
• A specially created company that is owned and managed by
local government
• Smaller organisation with a focused mandate; typically reports
directly to city political officials
• Independent outside organisation that is given the responsibility
of managing the public transport system
10 The role of public transport prioritization in (re)shaping cities
Managing relations with public transport operators, through contracts and service level agreements,
including the definition of performance criteria, preparation of service contracts and monitoring of
performance
Coordination of the funding of the system, via funding agreements with the GoB and public and
private operators
Fare policy, involving the definition of the range of tickets and annual revision of prices
Development of projects commissioned by other Administrations to ensure compliance with the
functions of the GDMTA
Definition and promotion of the corporate image of the Metropolitan Public Transport System and
public transport in general
The main decision driver is where to place the regulatory functions of a
metropolitan transport agency
Planning of infrastructure and services, including the definition of operational aspects (routes,
frequencies, etc), programming investments and supervising the corresponding projects 1
2
3
4
5
6
11 The role of public transport prioritization in (re)shaping cities
The best case is a hierarchized institutional model, with a clear division of
capabilities among the public agencies involved
PM
BRT
REG
Other operators
Sometimes this model have to deal with some confusion
created by the national/regional decision makers
PM PM National Local
REG
BRT
Other operators
Rail/Metro
PM
BRT
REG
Other operators
12 The role of public transport prioritization in (re)shaping cities
The opposite option is an inverse hierarchized model …
Ej. León, México
National
PM
BRT
PM PM PM PM Local
Normally combined with a parallel structure of conventional
public transport
BRT Op Op Op Op
National
PM PM PM PM PM Local
Typically the BRT operator is “naturally” placed as a “virtual
regulator” of the whole system
PM
BRT
Op
PM PM PM PM Local
Op Op Op Op
Ej. Transmetro Bogotá, Metro Caracas, Transmetro Guatemala
Ej. León, México
National
PM
BRT
PM PM PM PM Local
Normally combined with a parallel
structure of conventional public transport
BRT Op Op Op Op
National
PM PM PM PM PM Local
13 The role of public transport prioritization in (re)shaping cities
A third usual model is the creation of “competitive” regulatory agencies
PM
REG
BRT Op
REG
(other mass transit
systems)
Op Op Op Op
14 The role of public transport prioritization in (re)shaping cities
Finally, a more political option is progressing towards a consensus among
the policy agencies, through SPV (Foundations, Consortiums, etc.)
Sometimes, these consortium are created on the PM level…
PM
BRT Op
PM PM PM PM
Op Op Op Op
Ej. Madrid
… or placed in the regulatory level, but sharing the competences
PM
REG
Op
PM PM PM PM
Op Op Op Op
Ej. Transantiago
The main risk of this option is the obligated concurrence of the SPV with
complementary regulatory agencies
PM
Op
PM PM PM PM
Op Op Op Op
REG
REG REG
Sometimes, these consortium are
created on the PM level…
PM
BRT Op
PM PM PM PM
Op Op Op Op
Ej. Madrid
… or placed in the regulatory level,
but sharing the competences
PM
REG
Op
PM PM PM PM
Op Op Op Op
Ej. Transantiago
15 The role of public transport prioritization in (re)shaping cities
Table of Contents Introduction: initial thoughts on BRT
implementation needs
The public agencies framework: discussion
of alternative models
Public Private partnership opportunities in
BRTs
Conclusions
16 The role of public transport prioritization in (re)shaping cities
Once the institutional framework is decided, the operational structure
should be addressed: some important opportunities for PPPs could be
identified
• Under the business model framework for the BRT system there exist five principal actors: the BRT Regulator, Trunk Route Operators,
Feeder Route Operators, Fare Collection Company and Trust.
• Private concessions will be used to develop the system, including the operation of buses and the collection of fares.
• It is also possible to use concessions during the construction of the infrastructure. In this way, the policy makers can secure the investment required
through private companies and therefore share the financial risk while at the same time maintaining control.
Business Model
BRT System
BRT Regulator
Trunk Route
Operators
Feeder Route
Operators Trust
Fare Collection Company
• System planning
• Day to day programing of the integrated operations
• Quality control
• Resource management
• Purchase of feeder vehicles
• Maintenance of vehicle fleet
• Operation of feeder services
• Management of personnel within concession
• Manage revenues from fare collection
• Act as clearing house to divide revenues between system entities
• Acquire fare collection and ticketing equipment
• Maintenance of equipment
• Collection of fares from service users
• Purchase of trunk vehicles
• Maintenance of vehicle fleet
• Operation of trunk services
• Management of personnel within concession
17 The role of public transport prioritization in (re)shaping cities
A joint participation between public and private companies can be
expected in a number of BRT main and complementary business
Economic compensation for
rationalization
BRT Corridor construction
Fleet scrapping program
BRT Corridor maintenance
Terminals construction &
maintenance Stations construction &
maintenance
Bus fleet purchasing
Security and cleaning
services
Bus operation
Fare collection and
clearing house
+ for PPP
+ for Public + for Private
18 The role of public transport prioritization in (re)shaping cities
18
Many other complementary activities can be sorted out from the core
business of the BRT operation, and assigned to private companies
Real estate
Security services
BRT Operation
Shopping
Fare Collection
and Trust
Maintenance
Services
- Road
- Stations
- Terminals
- Fleet
Facilities
operation
Rickshaws integration
Main
BR
T o
pe
rati
on
al
bu
sin
es
s
+
+
19 The role of public transport prioritization in (re)shaping cities
19
The relationship between public and private companies in BRT
operations can be addressed through 5 main actions
Incorporation of a number of current bus
operators through negotiation or tender
processes
Fleet Scrapping
Program and
incentives to operators
Tenders for Fare
Collector and Trust
Fund operators
An economic compensation
mechanism for route rationalization
Fare policy
1
2
3 4
5
20 The role of public transport prioritization in (re)shaping cities
Table of Contents Introduction: initial thoughts on BRT
implementation needs
The public agencies framework: discussion
of alternative models
Public Private partnership opportunities in
BRTs
Conclusions
21 The role of public transport prioritization in (re)shaping cities
Conclusions
• The institutional framework is a key element for a BRT implementation
• The most successful models have been generally based on the separation of
Policy, Regulatory and Operational functions. A hierachized model is the best
preferred option
• Leaving the institutional issues unaddressed most likely might result in unresolved
constraints and obstacles to project implementation, thus reducing the
effectiveness of the envisaged solutions to integrate urban and transport planning
• There are a number of opportunities to private partnership in the core and
complementary business of the BRT operations
• Existing operators should be the preferred system operating unit for the BRT
• It is recommended to contract an external fare collection agency and/or clearing
house to improve transparency in the distribution of revenues
Contact person
www.alg-global.com
BARCELONA
Tanger 98, 3ª planta
08018 Barcelona (Spain)
Tel: (+34) 93 430 4016
Fax: (+34) 93 363 0623
[email protected] BEIJING BILBAO BUENOS AIRES CARACAS DUBAI LIMA LISBON LONDON MADRID MEXICO CITY MILAN PARIS RABAT SAO PAULO