S. Blankhart

Transport for the Urban Poor in Lusaka

Homepage Manual Contents Navigation

PART TWO: TRAVEL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE LOW-INCOME GROUPS - Survey Methodology and some socio-economic Data

This study focuses on transport for the low income groups in Lusaka. The Central statistical Office in the 1974/75 Household Budget Survey defined the urban low-income groups as those households who during the 1974/75 survey were in receipt of gross monthly incomes of less than K100, Since 1974/75 incomes increased and therefore it is preferred to define the low-income groups as the bottom 67% of households income-wise, as in 1974/75 67X of the urban households and incomes of less than K100 per month. Today this breakpoint might he K140 but this is conjecture since CSO did not conduct a full-scale survey since 1976. (Figure based on information from, C.S.O.) The figure of K140 does not divert much from the low-income breakpoint as used by the Housing Project Unit of the Lusaka Urban District Council. Before 1979 the households earning less than K70 were considered as low-income households, but in 1979 this was raised to K120. For the purpose of this study we will define the low-income group as those households earning less than K140 per month in 1980.

The mean income in squatter settlements in 1974/75 was K77, which is well below the 1974/75 low-income breaking point of K100 (CSO, 1980). The 1974/75 mean income in low-cost housing areas, including the site and service schemes was K118 (CSO, 1980). The squatter settlements were chosen as target areas for this study on transport for the urban poor although it is recognized that a considerable number of households belonging to the lowest income groups live in low-income-or high-income housing areas and in site and service schemes and that a proportion of the population in squatter settlements earns more than the low-income breaking point, In 1980 nearly half of the population (48%) of Lusaka lived in one of the (upgraded) squatter settlements. Five different squatter settlements were chosen to get a better insight in the travel pattern of the lowest income groups.

Map 4: Survey areas

Data collected on questionnaires by the Lusaka Housing Project Evaluation Team were used for this study. (The Lusaka Housing Project Evaluation Team conducted research on various aspects of the Lusaka squatter settlement upgrading and site and service project carried out by the Housing Project Unit. A large amount of basic socio-economic data have been gathered and analyzed. The findings were published in 37 working papers and a final report. Some data however, e.g. on transport have not been extensively and separately analyzed. The Research Unit of the Department of Town and Country Planning made thankful use of these data) These data were collected on a sample basis in each of the five squatter settlements. The information was gathered from May, 1976 till May, 1977 in Ghipata, Garden, Old Kanyama, Chawama and George (see Map 4). A representative sample was chosen and 1652 persons were interviewed representing the heads of households and all the other working household members.

Data on places of work, incomes, expenditure on transport and modes of transport to work were recorded from the original questionnaires. These recorded data were processed by computer and then analysed. In the five squatter settlements which were studied in 1980 lived a total of 76,ooo people. So the sample represents approximately 20% of the total population of Lusaka and an even higher percentage of the lower income groups of Lusaka.

Only information on travel to and from work is included, excluding trips made for shopping, recreation, attending health facilities etc. It is assumed that the main type of travel undertaken is the journey to and from work. A time budget survey in the squatter settlement George found that 41% of the non-working population did not travel at all and 52% travelled 1-8 hours per week, whereas of the working population (the employees) 54% spent 1-8 hours per week travelling and 44% spent 9-16 hours travelling (LHPET, 1977b). From this type of budget survey it can be concluded that travel to work is the most important travel undertaken.

The persons interviewed were the heads of households (1432 households) in the sampled buildings and all the other members of these households who earned cash or keep (170 persons). It is therefore not surprising that the unemployment rate found is relatively low: only 5.7% of. the persons interviewed were recorded as being unemployed, that is not earning cash or keep and excluding the people whose sole source of income is rent collected from rooms or houses. The unemployment rate in the survey areas is likely to be higher as the unemployed members of the households were not incorporated in this study. The unemployed heads of households mostly had an income from savings or were kept by relatives. More than 67% were employed in the formal employment sector and 27% earned their living in the informal employment sector. The mean income found was K76.54 per person per month. (All incomes and prices mentioned it: this part of the study are 1976/77 figures, when the interviews were conducted.) It should he noted that the number of Persons interviewed worked part-time only (especially marketeers) reducing average incomes per month. The average household income was K85.30 per month, further income figures in this study will only relate to incomes per person per month. The income figures exclude the people who did not wish to reveal their incomes (2.7% of the persons interviewed).

There is a difference between mean incomes in the five study areas ranging from K63.09 in garden, K63.88 in Chawama, K76.04 in Chipata, K79.63 in George to K89.60 in Kanyama. More important than these mean income figures is the income distribution. The bulk of the population had an income between K25 and K100 (71.7%). 15,8% earned more than K100 and few persons earned more than K200 (3.4%). The income distribution in these squatter settlements is not as skewed as the household income distribution in the whole of Lusaka. Therefore the travel characteristics found in the squatter settlements do not give a picture of the individual travel pattern of the total population of Lusaka.