Pricing public transit: learning from Bangkok
Yasmin Chowdhury
When I first visited Bangkok
Then the city started to build their skytrain. I waited with great anticipation for its completion. It seemed to require a lot more time and a lot more money (OK, just two years of delay and three times over budget) than originally anticipated, and the fares are admittedly quite high, but it was finally built—if never finished. (I saw an article in a Thai newspaper about people very upset that the planned line to their area had never been built; meanwhile, the pilings leading to the now domestic-only airport have been converted into advertising posts.)
To be quite honest, I love the skytrain. Sure, the cement structure looming overhead is ugly. Sure, most of the stations lack escalators, making them inaccessible to those in wheelchairs, and exceedingly difficult for those lugging heavy bags or luggage. Sure, the two lines only cover a very limited portion of Bangkok
Though the skytrain certainly makes moving around the city much easier (if you can afford it), it obviously didn't alleviate the congestion, as the government then opened a very limited subway system. The first time I tried to ride it, about a year after it opened, it was closed for two weeks due to an accident. I finally rode it a couple years after that, and discovered that it cost about US$0.50 to ride what it would take me ten minutes to walk. That seemed outrageous, and I don't love riding up and down long escalators and traveling in tunnels. Since the Metro doesn't seem to go much beyond the skytrain, I stick to the skytrain.
But now, after spending billions of dollars on those mass transit systems, and despite having an existing extensive bus system, and more roads than most Asian cities of their level of economic development, the government is now planning bus rapid transit—a bit like a street-level trolley, but with buses instead of trams. Of course, that too is delayed—but the cost is a fraction of that for the skytrain and Metro.
A more careful look at those costs reveals something interesting and of considerable relevance as Dhaka plans its public transit system. According to various Web sites, the skytrain, which opened in 1999, cost about US$1.5 billion for 24 kilometers. That amounts to US$62.5 million per kilometer. Of course, things were cheaper back then.
Construction of the Metro began back in 1996, but it wasn't finished until 2004. According to Wikipedia, "The project suffered multiple delays not only because of the 1997 economic crisis, but also due to challenging civil engineering works of constructing massive underground structures deep in the water-logged soil upon which the city is built." Interesting. Fortunately we don't have those troubles in Dhaka (ahem!).
As for cost, the Metro cost a mere US$ 2.75 billion for 21 km, or US$130.95 million per kilometer—just over twice that of the skytrain. Apparently burrowing underground, dealing with flooding issues, providing ventilation, and so on is much more expensive than building above our heads. Meanwhile, again quoting Wikipedia, "ridership has settled down to around 180,000 riders daily — considerably lower than projections of over 400,000, despite fares being slashed in half from 12-38 baht to 10-15 baht per trip. As of 2006, fares range between 14-36 baht per trip." With an exchange rate as I write of 32 baht to one US dollar, that's a mighty high fare. Good thing Bangladeshis are wealthier than Thais (??).
Meanwhile, the anticipated cost for the BRT is 33.4 million for 36 kilometers. Admittedly, anticipated costs are often far less than actual costs, but still, at US$0.93 million per kilometer, that's a bargain compared to the Metro or the skytrain—even more so when considering it's being built last, when prices are highest. At 67 times less than the skytrain and 141 times less than the Metro, even with significant cost increases, it will still be far more affordable than its public transit predecessors.
Of course, operational costs are another issue. Buses require fuel, trains electricity. Buses tend to require more maintenance, tires wear down frequently, and buses have to be replaced far more often than trains. While it is cheaper to build a BRT system initially, the higher operational costs might mean that, in the long term, a tram system would be more affordable—tram meaning street-level light rail, not something up in the sky or underground, which greatly multiplies the costs.
Which is all to say, I'm all for public transit. So, apparently, are Thais: last I checked, hotels and housing advertise their proximity to the various public transit options. Apparently people are sick and tired of sitting in cars stuck in traffic jams. In public transit, you can sit back and read a book while you ride, look out the window (preferably not at tunnels), eavesdrop on your neighbor's conversation, and otherwise amuse yourself without risking crashing into someone once the traffic moves again.
But when considering spending millions or billions on public transit, it would make sense to invest it wisely, in a system that will be the most extensive and least expensive, and thus offer the best value for the money. At 141 times per kilometer less to build BRT than Metro, we could both have a far more extensive system, meeting far more people's needs, and lower fares. Sounds like a bargain to me!
AbdurRahim Azad <Arahim.azad@gmail.com> wrote:
A horrendously discriminatory privilege
Tayeb Husain
I read with utmost sorrow the news item in Bangladeshi media that duel citizenship will be offered only to Bangladesh origin British passport holders only. The announcement has been made by none but the Chief Adviser Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed during his recent London visit in which he is reported to have said that "from now on, British passport-holder Bangladeshis would automatically retain their Bangladeshi citizenships".
Personally I am against offering such a privilege to Bangladeshi origin foreign citizen, whether one is a British or a Nepalese passport holder, but I strongly believe that if and when government offers any such privilege to the expatriate children it must be to all Bangladeshi origin foreign citizens and not to any particular group only. I consider this "extra privilege offered" to British citizens only is horrendously discriminatory, unfair, unjust, unwise and totally silly. I condemn it clearly and loudly.
Those of us settled in Europe and North America often faces discrimination in job market, in social and cultural life in our adopted countries and we know how painful it is to be discriminated. Now our motherland applies the same discriminatory law while treating us with a privilege. Once again I strongly condemn this discriminatory law and urge the Bangladesh government to withdraw this offer or if the offer must be evoked, let it be available to all Bangladesh origin foreign citizens.
Here I explain why I oppose duel citizenship, voting right and other privileges to Bangladesh origin foreign citizen. I strongly oppose expatriates' voting rights on principles and practical reasons even though it is against my personal interest. I sincerely believe that none should have divided allegiance and one should be fully loyal to the country one lives, earns a living and finally becomes a citizen. This is the basic principle I am talking about.
Voting Rights, Duel Citizenship and Owning property in Bangladesh
Offering voting right to an expatriate is wrong. Bangladesh and many other countries allow/offer double citizenship to immigrants with full rights and responsibilities of a normal resident. Rich western countries do it for certain reasons. For example, many US citizens have Israeli citizenship where they work and help the Israeli nation. They are mostly American Jews. The British and the French also allow dual citizenship and traditionally it has been so due to unholy colonial interest of the colonialist powers but the practice still continues.
Bangladesh is a poor country and it was very generous of her to offer an immigrant from Bangladesh double citizenship and even a Bangladeshi passport knowing it well that the immigrant is a foreign citizen now and has a passport from his/her adopted country. This generosity of Bangladesh has offered good and bad opportunities to many people. To a good person it gives a sense of nostalgia and he/she always fondly remembers his country of origin with deep gratitude and love. Such a decent person returns this generosity of his/her motherland doing good things in return when an opportunity comes. However, these types of people are very few and often very rare. An individual is always after his/her personal interest and there are many who would go to any extent to gain a little extra profit whenever he/she gets an opportunity to do so. There are also certain criminals who use this opportunity to maximise benefits of their many horrendous crimes. Often the generous rules and regulations of the criminals' adopted countries offer these criminals safe haven and the countries of origin of the criminals cannot take any action against them for their crimes committed in his/her country of origin. Many criminals from Arab countries moved to the UK on the pretext of political persecution in their home countries and the same pretext were used by many people from former communist countries to get a safe sanctuary in Western Europe. Some expatriates/immigrants from underdeveloped countries can be classified as political touts and basically, ordinary criminals. Sometimes they are politically connected with political touts at home and very often co-operate with corrupt politicians of their home countries to share their ill earned money or social or political advantages. Some well-established expatriates also go back to their countries of origin to take part in direct politics and hold ministerial posts by offering money to political organisations or directly to party bosses. These people are basically corrupt and live high life in Bangladesh mostly by corruption at the cost of poor Bangladesh.
Now, what can be done or what rights and privileges to be offered to a Bangladeshi immigrant/expatriate? Recently, someone has even proposed in Bangladesh media that two seats of the national parliament should be reserved for the expatriates. I consider it unfair and dangerous for Bangladesh. I shall suggest that except 'No visa requirement' seal at a reasonable fee on the foreign passport of an expatriate no other right or privilege should be offered to anybody as long as he/she carries a foreign passport. The double citizenship business should be cancelled and every expatriate/immigran t should declare his/her assets in Bangladesh if he/she stays in the country more than three months at any given time. No immigrant should be allowed to own agricultural land in Bangladesh if he/she does not cultivate and properly use it for agriculture or farming purpose. Sometime ago I read in the media about an expatriate living in USA asking the government to intervene because a criminal in Bangladesh had grabbed his land. While I do not support any land-grabbing by anybody, I strongly oppose any foreign citizen owning any land in Bangladesh under any circumstances. Bangladesh is a very small country, land per capita in Bangladesh is lowest in the world and under such circumstances no expatriate should be allowed to own agricultural or commercial land in Bangladesh if he/she does not return home and live in Bangladesh permanently.
Regarding jobs in Bangladesh, anybody with foreign passport/citizenship should not be allowed to seek any job in Bangladesh except those foreign experts whom Bangladesh may need for certain special jobs.
Again, anybody who is a Bangladeshi citizen with a Bangladeshi passport but did not live in Bangladesh continuously over a year or so (except those who are abroad on government duty or studying in a foreign country) should not be allowed to vote or to take part in any election or seek any government office. Any one in service with the Bangladesh government with foreign citizenship should be found out, dismissed and in case where any one who has hidden his/her foreign connection while serving the government should be sent out of the country after checking properly his/her assets and foreign links.
By adopting such a strong measure against the expatriates Bangladesh may prove itself very unkind or even hostile towards its 'lost' children but these measures are very necessary to safeguard the interest of Bangladeshi people and to curb the ill activities of a great number of criminals who are Bangladeshi expatriates/immigrants and foreign citizens.
Syed Siful Alam Shovan
shovan1209@yahoo.com
You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost. __._,_.___
[* Moderator's Note - CHOTTALA is a non-profit, non-religious, non-political and non-discriminatory organization.
* Disclaimer: Any posting to the CHOTTALA are the opinion of the author. Authors of the messages to the CHOTTALA are responsible for the accuracy of their information and the conformance of their material with applicable copyright and other laws. Many people will read your post, and it will be archived for a very long time. The act of posting to the CHOTTALA indicates the subscriber's agreement to accept the adjudications of the moderator]
Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___
