2
Dakar experience in bus reform
INRETS
DEST
Dakar experience in bus reform
A report prepared by Xavier Godard
For the World Bank Group
contract N° 7132248 to Inrets, stated 03 January 2005
April 2005
Inrets, 2 Av Gal Malleret Joinville, 94114 Arcueil Cedex France, tel 33 1 47 40 70 00
Report on Dakar experience in bus reform
This report has been prepared as a contribution to the project of toolkit prepared by the World Bank on bus reform.
A visit of one week in Dakar by X Godard has been organized from 25 January to 1 February 2005. It has been facilitated by C Diou and I Diouf (World Bank, Dakar) thanks to them.
This report is based on different sources:
· Documentation accumulated by X Godard since 1990.
· Reports transmitted by World Bank and by Cetud during the visit in Dakar
· Discussions with persons in charge of the urban transport in Dakar
Difficulties of availability and organization in Cetud have limited the information got from Cetud: actually only two reports have been transmitted by Cetud who was mobilized by the study called PDUD (Plan de Déplacements Urbains de Dakar).
This report is exactly structured according to the scheme presented in the Terms of Reference. When necessary some parts are referred to other parts covering the same theme. We have also developed some points which were not specifically mentioned in the TOR but seemed to be key elements in the lessons of Dakar experience in bus reform.
Contents
I Political context p 5
I-1- Institutional structure including allocation of powers between jurisdictions
I-2- Central government policy position on private supply in public transport
I-3- Existence of a private sector in other public utility sectors
I-4- Local government policy stance and willingness to reform
II Economic conditions p 7
II-1- National GDP per capita
II-2- Percentage of income spent on public transport
II-3- Current public transport fares and costs, in current dollar equivalents
II-4- Other data
III Current public transport patronage, by mode p 10
III-1- Passenger numbers by category: daily trips by mode
III-2- Ticket types
III-3- Passenger load factors
IV Structure and organization of urban public passenger transport in city p 12
IV-1- Organizational structure: the components of the urban transport in Dakar
IV-2- Legal basis for organization: CETUD as organizing authority;
IV-3- Vehicle ownership and management;
IV-4-Vehicle purchase, finance and insurance;
IV-5- Legislative instruments;
IV-6- Staffing and skills analysis;
IV-7-Facilities and equipment;
V Service supply characteristics p 20
V-1- Operational characteristics
V-2- Current bus routing and scheduling plan;
V-3- Income and expenditure statements of main operators
VI Vehicle related data p 24
VI-1- Nature of vehicle ownership
VI-2- Operational constraints on supply of vehicles and financial arrangements
VI-3- Financial arrangements in place for the operators to purchase buses;
VI-4- Inventory of vehicle fleet, classified by age, type and maintenance status;
VI-5- Nature of routine maintenance and capital rehabilitation
VI-6- Vehicle operating costs per km in service
VII Existing regulatory arrangements and institutions p 27
VII-1- Formal steps of the reform
VII-2- Review of market conditions set up by various government agencies,
VII-3- Fare and fare change mechanism;
VII-4- Effects of unions and union regulations;
VII-5-Taxation and other incentives/constraints.
VIII Perceived problems p 30
VIII-1- Insufficient service;
VIII-2- Poor quality of service;
VIII-3- Poor vehicle maintenance;
VIII-4- Inefficient operating procedures
VIII-5- Antisocial or dangerous on-the-road behavior;
VIII-6- Inappropriate vehicle type and size;
VIII-7- Physical predation by the informal sector;
VIII-8- Violence between operators;
VIII-9- Maltreatment of customers;
VIII-10- Corruption in administration.
IX Attributed causes p 34
X Drivers of the reform program and main lessons. p 35
X-1 Key-drivers
X-2 Objectives of the reform
X-3 Obstacles and difficulties of the reform
X-4 Main lessons
XI Spatial planning and sociological context for competitively tendered franchises p 38
XI-1 Intended infrastructure development: busways
XI-2 Sociological context for competitively tendered franchising
Annexes p 39
I Political context
I-1-Institutional structure including allocation of powers between jurisdictions
Senegal is a democracy, with a real changeover of power in the Presidency: the President and the Parliament are elected. The last election for the President was held in 2000.
Many Ministries are concerned by the urban transport sector. The main of them are:
- Ministry of Equipment and Transport
- Ministry of Economy and Finance
- Ministry of Trade
- Ministry of Interior
The Governor of Dakar Region is involved in traffic management and enforcement. He is also in charge of stating the licenses for taxis.
Laws were stated in 1996 on the decentralization process, in particular the 96 – 06 and 96 – 07 laws dated March 22, 1996 – respectively called the Local Authorities Code and the Transfer of Jurisdiction to Regions, and to Local Councils and Rural Communities.
The local authorities were supposed to be in position to create and to implement development programs of regional, local or rural interest, in line with the general policy defined by the State. Nine areas of jurisdiction such as Territorial Development, Planning, Town Planning and Housing, were thus transferred by the State to the local authorities. But the transport sector was not included in the field of application of this decentralization. It is still under the responsibility of the State.
An Organizing Authority for urban transport in Dakar Region has been created in 1997: Conseil Exécutif des Transports Urbains de Dakar (CETUD) see below. Actually Cetud is also involved in other medium size cities in Senegal (Thies, Kaolack…)
I-2-Central government policy position on private supply in public transport
The official position of Government is to push towards privatization of public transport in Dakar.
This orientation was stated in 1996 in the Statement of the urban transport policy, after discussions with the World Bank for launching the first project of urban transport in Senegal.
This first project included the so called privatization of Sotrac, the bus company operating since 1970. Actually Sotrac was not a State owned company but a mixed (public and private) enterprise: Société d’économie mixte, with a status of private enterprise.
The reality of the autobus company privatization has proved to be more complex than wanted (see IV-1).
Another attempt for privatization deals with the urban train operation, with many steps: the rail activity deserving Dakar and Bamako has been franchised to Transrail in October 2003. A new company (PTB SA) has been created in June 2003 to operate the urban line. It is a affiliate of the former public rail company SNCS. It is designed to be privatized when possible.
I-3-Existence of a private sector in other public utility sectors
A privatization process has been introduced in various sectors:
- Telecommunications : Sonatel (1997)
- Electricity: Senelec (1998)
- Water distribution : SDE (1996)
- Market management: Kermel market in Dakar, an attempt
New projects have been launched by President Wade since 2000. A special Agency has been created for their development: Apix (Agence pour la promotion de l’investissement et des grands travaux). These projects are designed to be operated and if possible built by private operators. Particularly one can mention:
- New airport project located further outside Dakar in a new area of development;
- Highway Dakar-Thies according to a BOT scheme.
But the implementation of this projects based on international private investors is very difficult and there is skepticism on their feasibility.
I-4-Local government policy stance and willingness to reform
Local governments (cities of Dakar, Guediawaye, Pikine, Rufisque, Bargny) are not usually involved in the urban transport sector as they consider it is the task of the State: it is consistent with the Law on decentralization which excludes the urban transport. The communes have been involved in the Board of the Organizing Authority Cetud which acts under the name of the State. Their role in Cetud seems rather weak, but this view is not shared by all.
In parallel some cities can try to develop some projects in urban transport as they think it is important to meet the travel needs of population. But they have no real means to develop these projects without agreement and funding by Cetud, at the exception of the commune of Dakar may be. For instance Dakar would like to develop a LRT project, but this idea is not yet connected to Cetud action.
II Economic conditions
II-1-National GDP per capita
Data differ according to the sources.
National GDP per capita was estimated around to 600 USD in 2000 according the Document of strategy for reduction of poverty (DSRP, 2002). This low level of resources justified the classification of Senegal in the Less Advanced Countries in 2001
According to Uemoa, the GDP of Senegal was 3511 Md Fcfa, or 5.1 Md USD in 2002 for a population estimated to 9.7 millions inhabitants. That corresponds to 526 USD per capita. Uemoa gives also another estimation of 480 USD per capita in 2001.
II-2-Percentage of income spent on public transport
The average share of household revenues spent on transport is 8.3 % in 2000, according Emtsu survey (Syscom 2001). The share of public transport expenses is 5.4% according the same survey.
One has reasons to think the expenses in public transport are underestimated in these surveys, but one cannot check if the share is really underestimated (Godard, 2002) as the households resources are also probably underestimated.
If one consider the distribution of revenues in households, this share of public transport expenses is lower for the quintil 1 (4.3%) and higher for the quintil 5 (5.6%). These differences are not so high. They are logically more important for individual modes expenses.
Table 1: Percentage of transport expenses according to the repartition of revenues
Quintil 1 / Quintil 2 / Quintil 3 / Quintil 4 / Quintil 5 / AllPublic transport / 4.3 / 5.4 / 4.9 / 5.4 / 5.6 / 5.4
Individual mode / 0.2 / 0.6 / 0.8 / 1.3 / 5.3 / 2.9
All transport / 4.5 / 6.0 / 5.7 / 6.7 / 10.9 / 8.3
Source Emtsu (Syscom, 2001)
This relatively low weight of transport expenses is due to the fact that many trips are made by walk (75%) and only a minority of them by motorized modes (25%).
Table 2: Individual rate of mobility in Dakar (number of daily trips per person)
poor / Not poor / allmen / women / men / women
Not motorized / 2.9 / 2.4 / 2.2 / 2.2 / 2.4
Motorized / 0.8 / 0.5 / 1.4 / 0.8 / 0.8
All modes / 3.7 / 2.9 / 3.6 / 2.9 / 3.2
Source Emtsu (Diaz Olvera, 2002)
II-3-Current public transport fares and costs, in current dollar equivalents
The official fares for the minibuses are said not to be really applied.
The average applied fares are the following (of course they depend on the length of trips, the time period etc):
Table 3: Fares applied by minibuses in 2004
Vehicle type / Peak average fare (Fcfa) / Off peak average fare Fcfa / Peak Average fare (US cents) / Off peak Average fare (US cents) / Standard deviationSG2, 23 seats / 87 / 83 / 16.5 / 15.5 / 37
Mercedes,
35-40 seats / 118 / 116 / 22.5 / 22 / 59
Source: Fideco, 2005
The extreme fares registered are 50 Fcfa as a minimum and 200 Fcfa as a maximum. There seems to be only a light difference between peak and off peak fares.
The fares applied by DDD vary from 150 to 225 Fcfa, or 28.5 to 43 US cents equivalent in January 2004.
Comment: The application of fares is bypassed by practices of cutting the lines in sub-lines (”sectionnement”), what obliges people to pay two or three times for only one trip. This practice is observed mainly in the peak period. For instance a typical trip from Dakar to Pikine the fare of which is officially 110 Fcfa costs often 200 Fcfa with a trip segmented in three travels in three different vehicles (Lombard, 2005). Many observers insist on this practice but its amplitude is not well estimated. Its influence was confirmed by the results of HH survey (Emtsu 2000) but in a proportion of around 30% to 40%. The reason given by operators to justify this practice of cutting the lines is the increased congestion which impedes them to implement the same number of travel than before and to get their “normal” revenue. In the opposite, in off peak period, there is some possibility for the passenger to bargain and to decrease the fare.
The average cost by trip for the user is given by the results from Emtsu survey in 2000 (Syscom 2001)
Table 4: Cost of a trip according to the main used means, Dakar 2000
Mode / Cost Fcfa / Cost US cents / Mode / Cost Fcfa / Cost US centsAutobus / 173 / 27 / Metered taxi / 663 / 102
Car rapide SG2 / 100 / 15 / Shared taxi / 157 / 24
Ndiaga Ndiaye / 154 / 24 / Clandestine taxi / 203 / 31
Source: Emtsu (Syscom 2001)
II-4-Other data
The average rate of motorization in Dakar Region is estimated to 16.7 cars/1000 inhabitants in 2000 (Emtsu, Syscom 2001). It is a low rate. It is said to have increased in the recent period with new intensive imports of vehicles.
The poverty line can be appreciated by data from Emtsu 2000 (Diaz, 2002). Taking in account the threshold of one USD by person by day, Diaz has introduced an equivalent resource around 21000 to 24000 Fcfa by month. That corresponds to the limit between the second and the third quintil of households so that the population considered as poor in Dakar is composed of the quintils 1 and 2. That represents 40% of the households in Dakar (but that is a higher proportion of the population as the poorest households have a higher size)
The declared access to urban services looks rather good, specialy for the schools, according to the results of Emtsu survey presented by Kane (2001). That comes probably from a good policy of settlements of these equipments (education, health) in the various areas of the city. It can explain also the low level of motorized mobility.