S. Blankhart

Transport for the Urban Poor in Lusaka

Homepage Manual Contents Navigation

PART TWO: TRAVEL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE LOW-INCOME GROUPS - Modal split of Journey to Work

The interviewed persons were asked which mode of transport they used to go to work. Table 2 gives the modal split per study area.

Table 2: Modal Split of Journey to Work

The figures given for the five study areas represent only the most important mode of transport used per person per month. The overall figure gives the range of percentages of people using a particular mode of transport in one month as some people use two modes of transport per day or month. In the text we will only refer to the first mentioned and most important mode of transport per person.

Walking is by far the most important mode of transport to work. Nearly all of the working population walks every day to and from their workplace. Bicycles and transport provided by the employer (mostly houses open trucks and vans) are equally important followed by buses and Minibuses and shared taxis. Minibuses and shared taxis were considered the same in terms of fares, routes and convenience. As expected in this study in the lowest income areas of Lusaka, only few people used their own car to and from work. Sometimes a private car is shared with friends or relatives. These passengers are then categorized as "using a friend's car" as their mode of transport. The category "other" includes a few motor cyclists. The category "not stated/not applicable" mainly consists of unemployed people.

Factors influencing choice of mode of Transport

The choice which mode of transport is used depends on a number of variables like mode of transport available, residential area distance to work and income. These variables are also inter-related. There is, for example, a relation between the area where a person lives and the place he works, whereby the mean distances to work do not diverge much per living area (see Chapter IV). As we saw in Chapter I mean incomes differ per residential area, which implies relationship between income and residential area.

These inter-relationships will not be elaborated here, but first the relation between each of the above mentioned variables and the mode of transport used to work will be examplified.

The mode of transport available influences the choice a person makes which mode to use. In Garden for example nobody used a minibus or taxi because these services were simply not provided.

For people who set free transport provided by their employer the choice which mode of transport to use will not be difficult. In this connection it is interesting to note that especially the relatively better paid people in the squatter settlements get transport provided by their employer. The higher income of this group (K87.24) can be explained by the fact that people who get employers transport are generally employed in larger formal sector companies or institutions where wages are higher. An example of the relation between the residential area and mode of transport to work can be found in Garden. In this settlement more people walk to their workplace (56.1%) than in other areas, which can be explained by the favourable central location of Garden in relation to the main places of work.

Distance to work was also factor expected to influence the choice which mode of transport to use. It was found that the percentage of walkers declines with distance. Nearly 90% of the persons working less than 3km away from their work, walked. Only 6.6% of all people who walked live seven kilometres or more from their work, whereas 15.3% of the total population lived seven kilometres or more from their place of work. Public transport is most important for the people living three kilometres or more from their workplace. Employer's transport is comparatively more important mode of transport for workers living five kilometres or more from; their workplace. There are very few people who cycle more than nine kilometres to their place of work but the number of cyclists is evenly distributed over the working population living one to eight kilometres from their place of work (see figure 2). A definite relation between income and mode of transport to work was found in the squatter settlements. In the higher income ranges relatively less people walked to their workplace: 56.7% of the people earning less than K50 walk to their workplace (against 45.0% of the total population). Cyclists are slightly overrepresented in the K25 - K75 income group and underrepresented in the lowest income group less than K25). The people who make most use of employers transport are those earning K50 - K200. Users of taxis and minibuses are mainly those earning more than K100; 21.1% of the people earning more than K100 use a taxi or minibus against 9.8% of the total population. People using a bus are found in all income groups.

Figure 2: Modes of Transport and distance to working places

The factors which are of most importance in the choice which mode of transport to work in used are income and distance. To establish whether the factor income or distance is the most important determinant, mean distances to work and mean incomes per group using a certain mode of transport, were calculated. The modes of transport were ranked according to the monthly expenses for that particular mode of transport. Walking was regarded as a free mode of transport. Assuming that the lifetime of a K130 bicycle is five years and repairs mount up to K1.50 a month, a cyclist spends K3.60 per month to be able to cycle to work daily. It was found that bus-users spent K4.21 per month and minibus and taxi-users K9.41 per month (see also next chapter). People who used their own car said they spent approximately ah average of K55 per month (see next chapter). People who used employers transport are not included in this analysis because this mode of transport cannot be considered as a free choice determined by distance or income. If free transport is provided employers make readily use of it. The people who mentioned that they used friends, or relatives, cars to travel to work or any other means of transport are also not included as mean costs connected with these modes of transport are difficult to establish and the absolute size of this group is very small (20 people of the 1652 people interviewed). The expenditure and mode of transport was plotted against the mean monthly income and mean distance to place of work (see figure 3). It appears that there is a clear positive correlation between the mode of transport used and the mean monthly income. The correlation between mode of transport used and distance to work is less pronounced. The more expensive modes of transport are used by people who earn more and not so much by people who work further away. The better paid people are willing and able to spend more money on more comfortable and faster modes of transport whereby the distance they have to travel is of less importance.

Use of different modes of transport.

There are some special groups of people regarding the mode of transport used throughout the month: 3.5% use two modes of transport per month, 1.4% use two modes of transport per day and 1% travels only once or twice a month over a longer distance to obtain goods. The people using two different modes of transport per month are found in all income groups. The average income of these people (K94 per month) is higher than the total average income (K76 per month). The people who use two modes of transport are mainly using a taxi or minibus the first half of the month and a bus (which is cheaper) the second half of the month when the monthly salary has been consumed for the largest part. The people who use two modes of transport per day are mostly people who get employees transport only once a day one way and walk the other way. Some people use public transport one way only and walk the other way. A very small but distinct group are the self-employed marketeers and shopkeepers who go only once or twice a month to the city centre to obtain goods which they resell in their own residential area. These people used different modes of transport than the other workers. A relatively large number used a taxi or minibus to transport the goods. A good number also made use of private cars they borrowed or chartered.

Ownership of transport means

Considering the different modes of transport, ownership of transport means is also an important factor, whereby we exclude the people who made a living by transporting people or goods (taxi and bus-drivers and owners). More than 20.0% of the people owned a bicycle, but only 12-9% cycled to their place of work. It can be assumed that a number of bicycles were not in running order. When employer's transport is provided, bicycle-owners often leave their bicycles at home. Only six persons (0.4%) had a motorcycle, but hot all of them used the motorcycle to their workplace (see table 2, category "other"). Thirty-one persons (2%) had a car and four had even two or more cars (whether or not in running order). A relatively large number of the car-owners were self-employed using their cars in connection with their own business.

Table 3: Vehicle ownership per income group

Car owners are over-represented in the higher income groups. Bicycle owners are quite evenly distributed over the various income groups (that is no relation is visible between cycle ownership and income.)

Figure 3: Relation between income, distance and transport mode