Mobility for the majority

Addressing the transport needs of the masses

by Niklas Sieber and Barbara Gruehl Kipke

Homepage gate No.3/1998 - Contents

from: gate No.3 /1998 - Mobility for the majority

Transport policies of governments and donors have largely focused on the motorised transport system by building and improving roads, railways and airports. But in Low Income Countries (LIC), a per capita GDP of only US$ 430 makes cars, planes and trains completely unaffordable for the overwhelming majority, and motorised transport services are often non-existent or too expensive to be used on a daily basis. In these countries the mere provision of transport infrastructure will not satisfiy the transport demands, and the dominant mode of transport is walking.

Focusing transport policies on 'roads and cars' has a number of negative implications in three different areas. All of which are discussed in contributions to this issue of gate. Rural areas host the majority of the population and three quarters of the poor. Niklas Sieber's article shows that people frequently walk long distances for water and energy and to reach workplaces, employment or social services. Walking is slow, constraining access to markets, agricultural inputs, credits, information, education, health services and consuming large amounts of time and energy, which is then missing for income generating activities. Thus walking restricts development in rural areas. Focusing on roads has often failed to induce a development process alleviating rural poverty.

Urban areas have different problems. Walter Hook demonstrates in his article on urban transport that whilst the vast majority of the urban population rely on walking as their primary means of transportation, massive investments are made which only benefit of the motor-vehicle owning minority. The subsequent problems of road accidents with 'vulnarable road users' as the main victims and congestion causing both productivity losses and increased levels of pollution need to be addressed by investing in more sustainable urban transportation alternatives. Furthermore, land use patterns should aim at developing a city of "short distances" rather than pushing more and more urban residents to the periphery.

Globally, C02 emissions from motor vehicles are causing an environmental threat. Increasing attention has to be paid to the Newly Industrialised Countires (NIC), where the motor vehicle population is growing rapidly. In the Low Income Countries (LICs) future transport is more likely to be affexted by the expected increase in fuel prices due to depleting oil resources. Governments of LICs have to anticipate significant increases in transport costs in the next 20-30 years in their transport planning for the future.

Roads and cars cannot solve many of the transport problems in developing countries and often create new ones. This does not mean that future transport strategies should neglect motor vehicles. Motorised transport is indispensable for carrying people and goods over long distances. But as with the industrialised countries, the majority of transport activities, measured not only in trips and transport time but also in terms of person and tonne kilometres, are over shorter distances. Here is the leverage point to enhance the mobility for the majority.

India, where an estimated 15 million animal carts transport 1,500 to 1,800 million tonnes annually, shows how important Intermediate Means of Transport (IMT) is. In rural areas 73% of the weight and 55% of the tonne-kilometres are transported by animal or human power. The widespread use of IMT was certainly one of the reasons why the Indian agricultural sector could grow at an annual pace of 3.1% in the last ten years. In China, the country with the world's fastest growth, the bicycle conveys millions of workers to their factories daily. What a difference to Sub Saharan Africa where IMTs are often scarce and the per capita production has been stagnating for decades.



In many Developing Countries a huge gap exists between motorised transport and walking. This gap can be filled by IMT - intermediate walking and driving cars - such as animal traction and proterage, bicycle, tricycles, wheelbarrows, carrying aids and country boats. IMT can have positive environmental, economic and social impacts. IMT is able to increase transport evviciency enormously without demanding alrge investments by owners. ITM enables their users to travel faster than walking and thus cover greater distances, and IMT users can carry bigger loads. IMTs open up production and employment opportunities which increase income, contributing directly to poverty alleviation. Better access to social service such as health and education improves welfare and will - in the long run - increase productivity and thus reduce poverty.

This gate issue provides a number of case studies and projects from all over the developing world, which show what IMT can achieve. In Sri Lanka exptended bicycles carry produce to markets; in Nicaragua this task is done by horse carts; in Bangladesh boats are used for rural transport; in Kenya donkeys hae been introduced to improve on-farm transport; in Uganda both women's and men's mobility is enhanced by enabling the subsidised purchase of bicycles, and in Tanzania bicycle hirers are facilitating much wider access to cycling.

Gender-related transport problems will be addressed in an article by Priyanthi Fernando and Barbara Gruehl Kipke in the next gate edition. A full length essay on this topic can be called up on - http://www.mobility-consult.com or http://www.gn.apc.org/ifrtd -.

Colin Relf explains in his contribution why IMT are not used more in the South, even though they have a tremendous potential to improve transport efficiency. Familiarity and confidence as well as viability and affordability affect the use of IMT.

However, a lot can be done to promote IMTs, such as improvement of existing means of transport, introduction of new IMTs, small scale credit schemes, training of mechanics and artisans, public awareness campaigns, bicycle routes, etc. Colin Oram explains his work on developing a low cost design for animal carts in Kenay and Uganda. A number of networks such as IFRTD, ATNESA, RELATA, SUSTRAN, ITDP, ICE, and RTTP are promoting a broader approach towards transport.

Apart from these piecemeal projects, comparatively little is being done to promote IMTs world wide. One of the main reasons is the bias of decision makers towards roads and cars. Prof. John Howe of Delft University says that "owning of a car has often been seen as embodiment of development, while rail water transport and NMT have frequently been neglected". In the eyes of transport planners and policy makers non motorised transport is usually regarded as marginal and therefore receives little attention.

Stefan Opitz's article on sustainable rural transport explains GTZ's transport approach. While IMT are mainly used on 'farm to market roads', where trucks operate more efficiently than IMT. In Bangladesh the use of IMT on the former roads increased without external support, after 'market to highway roads' where improved by GTZ. One of the major problems in the South is that existing road networks are not properly maintained. Opitz explains in another article how participation of beneficiaries in road maintenance improved conditions in disaster areas of Costa Rica. In order to finance maintenance, the project is setting up a local raod fund with contributions from local coffee producers.

Government regulations often hamper the proliferation of IMTs. In Kenya imported bicycles were classified as sports articles and like many luxury items charged with a high import duty. Fig. 2 shows that the reduction in import taxation entailed an enormous increase in bicycle imports. Colin Relf describes a similar situation in Malawi.



Even though poverty alleviation is on top of the agenda of most aid agencies, their transport policies have not often targeted the poor. One of the main reasons might be that road construction projects are much easier to administer and control than small-scale credit schemes for IMT. The massive road building activities financed by donors in the last 20 years have overburdened many countries with the task of maintaining extensive road networks. On the other hand, there is a lack of funds to promote IMT, which could improve the mobility of the majority. If poverty alleviation is not meant to be lip service, appropriate transport interventions have to receive far more attention and far more funds.

A comprehensive approach to transport policy in developing countries is now needed. An integrated mobility strategy should:

• include all types of transport (e.g. walking, cycling, local public transport, motorised individual transport etc.) in transport projects
• include the beneficiaries in the transport planning process (i.e. include pedestrians, cyclists, etc. forums) thus ensuring that people's needs and demands are taken into account
• consider not only transport infrastructures, but also the provision of the means of transport
• make cost/ benefit calculations covering all the internal and external costs and benefits
• take account of both qualitative and quantitative criteria to properly asses transport projects
• tackle the transport issue cross-sectorally (e.g. agricultural project with transport components or insistence on unified energy, transport and finance policy)
• give consideration to gender-specific aspects of mobility.