DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING A 180-credit dissertation submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Philosophy specialising in Transport Studies Case study analysis of Integrated Public Transport Networks in five South African cities UniversityPrepared of byCape Town Mikhail Manuel Supervised by A/Prof Roger Behrens July 2019 The copyright of this thesis vests in the author. No quotation from it or information derived from it is to be published without full acknowledgement of the source. The thesis is to be used for private study or non- commercial research purposes only. Published by the University of Cape Town (UCT) in terms of the non-exclusive license granted to UCT by the author. University of Cape Town The copyright of this dissertation vests in the author. No quotation from it or information derived from it is to be published without the full acknowledgement of the source. The dissertation is to be used for private study or non- commercial research purpose only. Published by the University of Cape Town (UCT) in terms of the non-exclusive license granted to UCT by the author. Declaration of Free License I, Mikhail Manuel, hereby: (a) grant the University free license to reproduce the above thesis in whole or in part, for the purpose of research; (b) declare that: Case study analysis of the factors that have contributed to the success or delay of initial expectations of the Integrated Public Transport Networks in five South African cities (i) the above thesis is my own unaided work, both in conception and execution, and that apart from the normal guidance of my supervisor, I have received no assistance apart from that stated below; (ii) except as stated below, neither the substance or any part of the thesis has been submitted in the past, or is being, or is to be submitted for a degree in the University or any other University. (iii) I am now presenting the thesis for examination for the Degree of Master of Philosophy in Transport Studies Signature______________________________ Date: 12 July 2019 Plagiarism Declaration I know that plagiarism is wrong. Plagiarism is to use another’s work and pretend that it is one’s own. I have used the Harvard-UCT convention for citation and referencing. Each contribution to, and quotation in, this dissertation from the work(s) of other people has been attributed and has been cited and referenced. This dissertation is my own work. I have not allowed, and will not allow, anyone to copy my work with the intention of passing it off as his or her own work. Signature ______________________________ Date : 12 July 2019 Abstract In 2007, 13 South African cities embarked on implementing Integrated Public Transport Networks (IPTN’s) guided by the Public Transport Strategy and Action Plan (PTSAP) published by the National Department of Transport (NDoT). The PTSAP sought to reform public transport industries across South Africa by 2020 to ward off increasing congestion, passenger dissatisfaction with overcrowding, long travel times, high travel costs, and safety concerns. Of the 13 cities, Nelson Mandela Bay Metropolitan Municipality (NMBM), City of Tshwane (CoT), City of Johannesburg (CoJ), City of Cape Town (CoCT), and George Local Municipality (GLM) had progressed the furthest by the end of 2017. However, all five Cities had experienced delays in achieving their IPTN project objectives. This dissertation investigates the underlying factors causing the delays. The research was guided by a framework of analysis developed by three core questions – the impact of the minibus-taxi industry negotiations, the impact of government’s capacity to implement, and the impact of South Africa’s urban form. The literature review begins with the fundamentals of reform of the three dimensions of the public transport industry: service characteristics, operator business structure, and competition. It then continues with a review of the history of attempts at reform in the minibus-taxi industry and bus industry, and a breakdown of the PTSAP. The literature review concludes with the fundamentals of mass transit use with an emphasis on the influence of urban form. Data were collected from media sources, government and academic publications, and qualitative semi-structured face-to-face interviews. The data were used to evaluate each IPTN system’s outcome and develop a chronology of each project’s implementation. In NMBM, Libhongolethu was delayed due to the strained relationship between the local minibus-taxi industry and the NMBM, and the alleged mismanagement of resources. It was concluded that a lack of political will and a lack of capacity-to-implement were the underlying factors. In CoT, A Re Yeng was delayed due to difficulty in developing adequate IPTN plans, and lack of foresight on the long-term impact of political decisions. It was concluded that weak planning capacity and poor political decision making were the underlying factors. In CoJ, Rea Vaya benefitted from the external pressure of hosting the World Cup, as well as strong political leadership in the minibus-taxi industry and CoJ during Phase 1A. However, the project still grappled with animosity between local minibus-taxi associations, the influence of national mother- i bodies on local associations, distrust of government within the minibus-taxi industry, industry transformation compensation benchmarking, and uncertainty following the 2016 local government elections. Therefore, it was concluded that politics within the minibus-taxi industry and government were the underlying factors. In CoCT, MyCiTi was delayed due to the inappropriate nature of BRT for Cape Town’s spatial form, higher than expected industry transition costs, budgetary cycles of government financial planning, and the moderation of services to improve financial sustainability. Therefore, it was concluded that an overall inappropriate solution to the public transport problem, prudent political leadership and adequate capacity-to-implement within the CoCT were the underlying factors. In GLM, GoGeorge was delayed because of inappropriate design restrictions imposed by the NDoT and changes in political leadership in quick succession at a vital stage of the project. Therefore, it was concluded that a lack of capacity within the NDoT and leadership instability were the underlying factors. In conclusion, all three core questions were found to be determinants of success or delay, while in addition, political will was also found to be a fundamental factor to success or delay. Analysis of the case-specific causes of delay found that all cases were ultimately delayed due to five fundamental factors: an inappropriately ambitious implementation timeframe, the incongruency between gold-standard BRT design and South African urban form, the difficulty of overcoming the complexity of trust between the minibus-taxi industry and government, political will, and government’s lack of capacity to implement a reform programme as complex as the PTSAP. ii acknowledgement This research was funded by the National Research Foundation, National Department of Transport, and the Volvo Research and Education Foundation through the Centre for Transport Studies at UCT. I am grateful to every bus and minibus-taxi stakeholder, government official, political office bearer, consultant, academic and university staff member that assisted me during the research process. Without your willingness to speak openly, to freely give of your time, and to review my analyses this dissertation would not have been possible. It was a joy to work, and learn, alongside you. To my supervisor, A/Prof Roger Behrens, it has been a joy to work closely with you over this period. Thank you for your patient guidance, input, and dedication to reviewing my work. To my family and friends, thank you for your encouragement and patience during this growing experience. iii Contents Abstract ............................................................................................................................................ i Acknowledgement ........................................................................................................................ iii Acronyms and terms .................................................................................................................... vii 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.1. Background ............................................................................................................................... 1 1.2. Research questions ............................................................................................................... 2 1.3. Document layout ................................................................................................................... 2 2 Research methodology ................................................................................................... 4 2.1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 4 2.2. Research strategy motivation ......................................................................................... 4 2.3. Research design ...................................................................................................................... 6 2.4. Research method .................................................................................................................... 7 2.5.