Shifts in transport

Sri Lanka’s regulated privately-owned bus service has declined 2% to 19,917 vehicles in the first half of 2017 from a year earlier, according to an official report released recently which suggested that the way people get from one place to another is changing in the country and called for different policies to be implemented.  

Sri Lanka’s privately-owned buses are tightly regulated through a route licensing system, which has straitjacketed a large number of individual bus owners, preventing consolidation and innovation. This, together with the climbing aspirations of people, has resulted in the increased use of personal vehicles or taxis. 

Sri Lanka has seen a renewed discourse on how it can increase its labour component into different segments of the economy. The Government previously outlined plans to limit three-wheelers on the assumption that it would increase productivity and reduce congestion on local roads. However, one aspect that has not received enough attention is the importance of improved public transport that would strongly reduce congestion as well as encourage people to seek jobs different to taxi drivers.  

Sri Lanka is fond of looking to Singapore as a model for development. On this front Singapore has followed policies completely contrary to Sri Lanka but for different reasons. Singapore is one of the most expensive places in the world to buy a vehicle but that is because they wish to maintain congestion-free roads, whereas vehicles are expensive in Sri Lanka because of the country’s large trade deficit.  

However, not content with its current policies, Singapore last month announced it would freeze the number of private cars on its roads for at least two years and has pledged about Sg$ 28 billion to improve public transport. The measure, to be reviewed in 2020, is an extension of Singapore’s already tough controls on vehicle ownership, which have helped the nation of 5.6 million avoid the traffic jams that choke other Asian cities.

Singapore’s approach is rare in Asia where the blistering pace of urban development in recent decades has often been accompanied by unchecked growth of car and motorbike ownership, spawning huge traffic jams in many major cities. Colombo is no different and successive Sri Lankan governments have concentrated on building expensive highways and other infrastructure rather than improving public transport. The move, which has won them votes, has exacerbated urban needs and severely reduced liveability in the capital.

Cities need to be planned. If, like in Sri Lanka, they are not, then smaller changes are needed to encourage progressive mobility. The further people have to commute, the more traffic they cause. It is impossible to create more and more roads for cars without substantially damaging the liveability of a city, so the only alternative is to improve accessibility.

The highway-obsessed mindset of policymakers must also change. Improving public transport would be cheaper and would have greater benefits for the people and other sectors of the economy also deserve the same level of attention. It could be that people are already making this shift and demanding that policymakers deliver. Even though the Government has already decided on a light rail project, wider implementation of upgraded public transport around the country may meet aspirations and improve the economy.