Travel Behaviors of the Disabled in Jakarta Metropolitan Area

TRANSED 2012

KAWAGUCHI, HirohisaWAKAMATSU, Miya

September 20, 2012At The Lalit Hotel, Delhi,

India1

Table of Contents

1. Purpose of the Study 2. Transportation and barriers in Jakarta

Legal FrameworkPublic TransportationPedestrian environment

3. Data Source and Methods 4. Results

Commuter Travel SurveyTransportation Equity Survey

5. Discussions and Conclusions2

1. Purpose of the Study

3

Purpose of the Study

Jakarta Metropolitan AreaRapidly growing economy and populationTraffic congestion has been the top priority issueLand transportation is virtually not accessibleLimited studies on travel behaviors of PWD

Studies on travel behaviors of PWD in developed countries (DPTAC, 2002 etc.)

Analysis on travel behaviors of PWD in developing countries in conjunction with poverty issues

4

2. Transportation and Barriers in Jakarta

5

Jakarta Metropolitan Area Capital region of one of the emerging

countries, Indonesia, a member of G20 Population of Jakarta Metropolitan Area is

about 28 million (2010) composed of Jakarta Special Capital Province (DKI Jakarta) (9 mil.) and surrounding cities and regencies.

6

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 -

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

0.8 1.1 2.1

3.2 4.0

5.0

1.1 1.5 2.7

4.1 4.7

5.9

1.9 2.7

3.9 5.3

6.1 7.5

4.6

6.5

8.2 8.4 8.8 9.6

DKI JakartaBogorTangerangBekasi

[Unit : million persons]

Source: Statistical Year Book of Indonesia 1998; opulation Census 2000, Population Census Intermediate Survey 2005, Population Census Preliminary FigureNote: 2005 data is intermediate survey of population census (or Survei Penduduk Antar Sensus) 2010 data is preliminary figures from DKI Jakarta, West Java and Banten Provinces

Surge in the number of Private Vehicles

7 Source: Polda Metro Jaya (Jakarta Metropolitan Police)Note: Vehicle registration excludes Bogor area

19751977

19791981

19831985

19871989

19911993

19951997

19992001

20032005

20072009

0

1,000,000

2,000,000

3,000,000

4,000,000

5,000,000

6,000,000

7,000,000

8,000,000

MotorcyclesCarsTrucksBuses

Congestion

Average travel speed of CBD area in evening peak hour is mostly less than 20km/h.

8

0 1 2 3 40.5km ±

0 1 2 3 40.5km ±

Legend19PM(Filter)F19

0 - 10 km11 - 20 km21 - 30 km31 - 40 km41 - km

Travel_Speed07KODE_UNSUR

UnknownUnknownUnkonwn

Source: Japan External Trade Organization (JETRO) (2008). Study on Jakarta Road Pricing in the Republic of Indonesia

Travel Speed of Weekday Evening Peak Hour (2007)

Improvement of BRT System

From private car oriented city to transit oriented city

Jakarta City developed 11 routes (184.31 km) of BRT system in 8 years.

Roughly 350,000 daily passengers

9

Legal Framework on Barrier Free

Act No. 4, of 1997, on Disabled People stipulates fundamental rights of disabled people

including accessibility to permit them to live independently

Act No. 22, of 2000, on Road Trafficobligates to consider persons with disabilities and

the elderly etc. Regional Regulation No. 10, of 2011 of Jakarta

stipulates accessible public transportation, education, health institutions and public facilities

Shift from pity-based to rights-based approach10

Barrier Free Conditions of Public Transport (1)

BRT (Transjakarta)Almost all bus shelters are equipped with

handrails and ramps.There are sometimes steps between a sidewalk

and a ramp in a BRTA few shelters are equipped with elevators, but

the elevators at one shelter are out of order.Connecting sidewalks are not maintained well.

11

Barrier Free Conditions of Public Transport (2)

Public busesThe most popular transport mode in JakartaLoose restriction of bus operation by the gov.Buses can stop anywhere along their routes.No barrier free facilities are installed .

RailwaysSome railway stations don’t have sufficient height

of platformsMeasures to provide route guidance are generally

not sufficient

12

Barrier Free Conditions of Pedestrian Env. (1)

Car-oriented road system rather than pedestrian-oriented

Pedestrian environment is almost inaccessible due to the following 3 factorsDesign without consideration of disabled people

13

Barrier Free Conditions of Pedestrian Env. (2)Lack of maintenance

Loose law enforcement

14

3. Data Source and Methods

15

JUTPI Project by JICA and Indonesian CMEA

The Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) and the Indonesian Coordinating Ministry of Economic Affairs (CMEA) jointly conducted the JABODETABEK Urban Transportation Policy Integration (JUTPI) Project from 2009 to 2012 for the purpose of revising the transportation master plan and supporting establishment of cross-sector and –boundary transportation coordinating body.

Series of transportation surveys including were conducted.

16

Commuter Travel Survey (CTS)

Home interview survey followed by a questionnaire

Origin & destination, transport mode of commuting trips were interviewed

Sample size is roughly 657,000 persons (about 3% of population of Jakarta Metropolitan Area) including 335,000 commuters

Random sampling from resident registration database

17

CTS Sample Size by Disability Type

Disability Type All Respondents Commuter Respondents

Visual Impairment 3,200 1,239Hearing Impairment 731 196Speaking Impairment 250 95Ambulant Disability 619 193Intellectual Disability 270 107Other Mental Disorder 168 85Complex/Others 600 161No Disability 646,195 330,350Unknown 5,117 2,542Total 657,150 334,968Total Weighted Population 27,900,000 14,300,000

18

Transportation Equity Survey (TES)

200 Sample of people with disability were utilized for this paper

Several facilities where the target group are living and gathering were selected for the survey considering geographical distribution and proportion of disability types

Interview survey followed by a questionnaire Major destinations, transportation modes,

availability of assistance, impacts, and opinions regarding the installation of new transportation policies for the disabled

19

TES Sample Size by Disability Type

Disability Type No. of RespondentsVisual Impairment 47Hearing & Speaking Impairment 57Ambulant Disability 26Intellectual Disability 9Other Mental Disorder 15Complex/Others 30Total 200

20

4. Results

21

CTS Result : Job Opportunities Jobless ratios of disabled people are higher than that of

people with no disability, especially for lower income groups For people with Intellectual disability or with ambulant

disability or with more than one disability, jobless ratios are higher

22

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%Visual Impairment

Jobless Housewife Others Retired Student Worker

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Visual ImpairmentHearing Impairment

Speaking ImpairmentAmbulant Disability

Intellectual DisabilityOther Mental Disorder

Complex/OthersNo Disability

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Note: Only population of working age from 18 to 59 years old was utilized to depict the above graphs. Weighted number of persons was utilized.

Social Status by Disability Type by Income Group of Working Ages

Monthly Household Income>= 1.5 million rupiahs (164USD)

Monthly Household Income< 1.5 million rupiahs (164USD)

CTS Result : Vehicle Ownership Vehicle ownership is dependent on income class rather than

disabilities The car ownership ratios of households with a disabled

member are higher than those without a disabled member. This is opposite for motorcycle

23

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Hhd. with Disabled Member

Hhd. without Disabled Member

Hhd. with Disabled Member

Hhd. without Disabled Member

Hhd. with Disabled Member

Hhd. without Disabled Member

Low

Inco

me

Med

ium

Inco

me

Hig

hIn

com

e

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

0% 50% 100%

Hhd. with Disabled Member

0 1 2 3+

Note: Weighted number of households was utilized. Low income group monthly household income is less than 1.5 million rupiahs (164USD); medium income group is 1.5-6.0 million rupiahs (164-654 USD); high income group is equal to or more than 6.0 million rupiahs (654USD).

Household Vehicle Ownership by Income Level by Disabled People

No. of Cars No. of Motorcycles

CTS Result : Workplace Location Workplaces of people with a disability and in lower household

income groups are closer to their homes. Workplaces of people with a disability and in lower household

income groups are closer to their homes. People with speaking or visual impairment tend to choose

more distant workplaces

24

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Low Income

Medium Inc.

High Income

Low Income

Medium Inc.

High Income

No

Dis

abili

tyW

ith D

isab

ility

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Low Income

Work at Home Same Village Same Sub-District Same City Other City0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Visual Impairment

Hearing Impairment

Speaking Impairment

Ambulant Disability

Intellectual Disability

Other Mental Disorder

Complex/Others

No Disability

Note: Only workers' data was utilized to create the above graphs. Weighted number of persons was utilized. Inc. means income. Same village/sub-district/city means the same village/sub-district/city as the home of the respondent.

Location of Workplace by Income Level and Disability Type

CTS Result : Commuting Mode Choice Roughly 50% of people with a disability in high income

households commute by car Roughly a half of the disabled in middle income households

commute by motorcycle. For the disabled in low income households, the majority have

no alternative to using non-motorized transportation.

25Note: Only workers' data were utilized to depict the above graphs. Weighted number of persons was utilized. Inc. means income.

Transportation Mode to Workplace by Income Level and Disability Type

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Low Income

Medium Inc.

High Income

Low Income

Medium Inc.

High Income

No

Dis

abili

tyW

ith D

isab

ility

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Visual Impairment

Hearing Impairment

Speaking Impairment

Ambulant Disability

Intellectual Disability

Other Mental Disorder

Complex/Others

No Disability

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Low Income

Car Motorcycle Taxi etc Public Transport Non-Motorized Transport

TES Result : No. of Trips and Policy Options 80+% of respondents answered that they would increase their

No. of trips if the fares were made less expensive. Priority seating, assistance in riding buses, special transport

service and improvement of signs and provision of information also may increase the No. of their trips.

26

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Inexpensive FarePriority Seating

Assistant in BusSpecial Transport

Sign & InformationBus Design

Assistance in Public PlaceBF Facility at Stop/Station

BF Sidewalks

Highly Increase Increase Not Sure Not Increase Not at all

Note: Only workers' data were utilized to depict the above graphs. Weighted number of persons was utilized. Inc. means income.

Potential of Increasing the Number of Trips by Policy Options

TES Result : Possibility of Travel Alone The respondents were also asked whether they could travel

alone if they were provided with better policy options. Special transport service showed the highest potential to

enable them to make a trip alone.

27

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Special TransportAssistant in BusPriority Seating

Bus DesignInexpensive Fare

Sign & InformationBF Facility at Stop/StationAssistance in Public Place

BF Sidewalks

Very Possible Possible Not Sure Not Possible Not at all

Possibility of Travel Alone by Policy Options

TES Result : Priority of Policy Options The share of the special transport service was the highest for

most disability types Shares of Barrier free sidewalks, assistance in public places,

barrier free facilities at stops and stations were also rated highly.

28

Policy Options of Top Priority by Disability Type

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Ambulant DisabilityComplex/Others

Hearing ImpairmentHearing&Speaking Impairment

Intellectual DisabilityOther Mental Disorder

Visual ImpairmentTotal

Special Transport BF Sidewalks Assistance in Public Place BF at Stop/Station Others

5. Discussions and Conclusions

29

Discussions and Conclusions (1) CTS illustrated distinct travel characteristics by

income level and implies mobility restrictions of low income group affect their mode choice and workplace choice.

TES indicated affordable public transportation may increase the chances of going out for people with disabilities

Provision of taxi tickets or special fares for public transportation could contribute to improve the mobility of people with disabilities, especially in the poverty stricken households

30

Discussion and Conclusions (2) A special transport service is one of the most sought-

after policies for disabled people. Infrastructures cannot be renovated in a short time. Some disabled people have no other alternative to using

the special transport service due to their physical conditions.

Since this could be a financial burden for local authorities, it would be more financially efficient to effectively utilize existing facilities. Ex. The redundant services can be converted to the special

transport service.

31

Discussion and Conclusions (3) It is not realistic to renovate all the sidewalks in a

short time considering the financial constraints. Some sidewalks are inaccessible due to inappropriate

design.

Training for the transportation planners and designers in universal design could be effective

By utilizing technical assistance from developed countries for the training, local authorities can save their limited assets.

32

Next Step

Detailed study on each policy option including implementation method, cost estimations and demand analysis taking the features of developing countries into account

Further studies in rural areas or less developed areas is awaited

33

Thank you !

Contact: kawaguchih@oriconsul.com

34