IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i13p7314-d585518.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) Meet the Citizens’ Mobility Needs? Evaluating Performance for the Case of Multan, Pakistan

Author

Listed:
  • Muhammad Nadeem

    (Graduate School of Urban Innovation, Yokohama National University, Yokohama 240-8501, Japan
    Directorate of Town Planning, Multan Development Authority, Multan 60000, Pakistan)

  • Muhammad Azam

    (School of Civil Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor Bahru 81310, Malaysia)

  • Muhammad Asim

    (Department of City & Regional Planning, University of Engineering & Technology, Lahore 54890, Pakistan)

  • Muhammad Ahmad Al-Rashid

    (Department of City and Regional Planning, School of Architecture and Planning, University of Management and Technology, Lahore 54770, Pakistan)

  • Othman Che Puan

    (School of Professional and Continuing Education, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor Bahru 81310, Malaysia)

  • Tiziana Campisi

    (Faculty of Engineering and Architecture, Kore University of Enna, 94100 Enna, Italy)

Abstract

Bus rapid transit (BRT) has emerged as an efficient and cost-effective transport system for urban mobility that offers safe and high-quality transport services for city dwellers. Recent research has widely discussed BRT systems’ performance evaluation, but such assessments have remained limited in the South Asian context, where users’ needs might be distinct. The present study addresses this research gap and evaluates the performance of the BRT system in Multan, Pakistan, based on the passengers’ perceptions and the BRT standard scorecard. The data were collected at 21 BRT stations, and a face-to-face questionnaire survey was carried out with 420 users. The BRT standard scorecard method was also applied by conducting an observation survey and semi-structured interviews based on the aspects as specified by the Institute of Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP). The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software package was mainly utilised for data analysis. This research concluded that around 54% of passengers are highly satisfied and opted for BRT due to comfort. Cronbach’s Alpha reliability analysis concluded that most of the BRT stations possess the acceptable value (0.8 > α ≥ 0.7), with only six out of 21 stations categorised as unacceptable (α < 0.5). Multan BRT achieved overall 79 scores and classified as Silver-Standard BRT. The study suggests critical insights to improve the citizens’ mobility with the existing BRT system, serving as a benchmark for policymakers and transport planners.

Suggested Citation

  • Muhammad Nadeem & Muhammad Azam & Muhammad Asim & Muhammad Ahmad Al-Rashid & Othman Che Puan & Tiziana Campisi, 2021. "Does Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) Meet the Citizens’ Mobility Needs? Evaluating Performance for the Case of Multan, Pakistan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-18, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:13:p:7314-:d:585518
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/13/7314/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/13/7314/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Aziz, A. & Nawaz, M.S. & Nadeem, M. & Afzal, L., 2018. "Examining suitability of the integrated public transport system: A case study of Lahore," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 13-25.
    2. Muhammad Ahmad Al-Rashid & Kh Md Nahiduzzaman & Sohel Ahmed & Tiziana Campisi & Nurten Akgün, 2020. "Gender-Responsive Public Transportation in the Dammam Metropolitan Region, Saudi Arabia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-17, October.
    3. dell'Olio, Luigi & Ibeas, Angel & Cecin, Patricia, 2011. "The quality of service desired by public transport users," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 217-227, January.
    4. Benedetto BARABINO & Eusebio DEIANA & proto TILOCCA, 2011. "Urban Transport Management And Customer Perceived Quality: A Case Study In The Metropolitan Area Of Cagliari, Italy," Theoretical and Empirical Researches in Urban Management, Research Centre in Public Administration and Public Services, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 6(1), pages 19-32, February.
    5. Eboli, Laura & Mazzulla, Gabriella, 2011. "A methodology for evaluating transit service quality based on subjective and objective measures from the passenger's point of view," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 172-181, January.
    6. Vermeiren, Karolien & Verachtert, Els & Kasaija, Peter & Loopmans, Maarten & Poesen, Jean & Van Rompaey, Anton, 2015. "Who could benefit from a bus rapid transit system in cities from developing countries? A case study from Kampala, Uganda," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 13-22.
    7. Kiani Mavi, Reza & Zarbakhshnia, Navid & Khazraei, Armin, 2018. "Bus rapid transit (BRT): A simulation and multi criteria decision making (MCDM) approach," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 187-197.
    8. Wan, Dan & Kamga, Camille & Liu, Jun & Sugiura, Aaron & Beaton, Eric B., 2016. "Rider perception of a “light” Bus Rapid Transit system - The New York City Select Bus Service," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 41-55.
    9. Hickman, Robin & Hall, Peter & Banister, David, 2013. "Planning more for sustainable mobility," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 210-219.
    10. Delbosc, Alexa & Currie, Graham, 2011. "The spatial context of transport disadvantage, social exclusion and well-being," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 19(6), pages 1130-1137.
    11. Currie, Graham & Richardson, Tony & Smyth, Paul & Vella-Brodrick, Dianne & Hine, Julian & Lucas, Karen & Stanley, Janet & Morris, Jenny & Kinnear, Ray & Stanley, John, 2009. "Investigating links between transport disadvantage, social exclusion and well-being in Melbourne--Preliminary results," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 97-105, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Xiaobei Jiang & Wenlin Yu & Wenjie Li & Jiawen Guo & Xizheng Chen & Hongwei Guo & Wuhong Wang & Tao Chen, 2021. "Factors Affecting the Acceptance and Willingness-to-Pay of End-Users: A Survey Analysis on Automated Vehicles," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-12, November.
    2. Muhammad Ashraf Javid & Nazam Ali & Tiziana Campisi & Giovanni Tesoriere & Krisada Chaiyasarn, 2022. "Influence of Social Constraints, Mobility Incentives, and Restrictions on Commuters’ Behavioral Intentions and Moral Obligation towards the Metro-Bus Service in Lahore," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-19, February.
    3. Rabia Soomro & Irfan Ahmed Memon & Agha Faisal Habib Pathan & Waqas Ahmed Mahar & Noman Sahito & Zulfiqar Ali Lashari, 2022. "Factors That Influence Travelers’ Willingness to Adopt Bus Rapid Transit (Green Line) Service in Karachi," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-35, August.
    4. Muhammad Nadeem & Nayab Khaliq & Naseem Akhtar & Muhammad Ahmad Al-Rashid & Muhammad Asim & Merve Kayaci Codur & Enea Mustafaraj & Muhammed Yasin Codur & Farrukh Baig, 2022. "Exploring the Urban Form and Compactness: A Case Study of Multan, Pakistan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-22, December.
    5. Saleem, Muhammad Abid & Afzal, Hanan & Ahmad, Farooq & Ismail, Hina & Nguyen, Ninh, 2023. "An exploration and importance-performance analysis of bus rapid transit systems’ service quality attributes: Evidence from an emerging economy," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 1-13.
    6. Risdiyanto Risdiyanto & Ahmad Munawar & Muhammad Zudhy Irawan & Miftahul Fauziah & Prawira Fajarindra Belgiawan, 2022. "Why Do Students Choose Buses over Private Motorcycles and Motorcycle-Based Ride-Sourcing? A Hybrid Choice Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-19, April.
    7. Arsalan Raza & Muhammad Umair Ali & Ubaid Ullah & Muhammad Fayaz & Muhammad Junaid Alvi & Karam Dad Kallu & Amad Zafar & Sarvar Hussain Nengroo, 2022. "Evaluation of a Sustainable Urban Transportation System in Terms of Traffic Congestion—A Case Study in Taxila, Pakistan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-25, September.
    8. Goedeking, Nicholas, 2024. "Broad support vs. deep opposition: The politics of bus rapid transit in low- and middle-income countries," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 211-223.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yanan Gao & Soora Rasouli & Harry Timmermans & Yuanqing Wang, 2020. "Prevalence of alternative processing rules in the formation of daily travel satisfaction in the context multi-trip, multi-stage, multi-attribute travel experiences," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 1199-1221, June.
    2. Benedetto Barabino & Nicola Aldo Cabras & Claudio Conversano & Alessandro Olivo, 2020. "An Integrated Approach to Select Key Quality Indicators in Transit Services," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 149(3), pages 1045-1080, June.
    3. Muhammad Ahmad Al-Rashid & Hong Ching Goh & Yong Adilah Shamsul Harumain & Zulfiqar Ali & Tiziana Campisi & Tahir Mahmood, 2020. "Psychosocial Barriers of Public Transport Use and Social Exclusion among Older Adults: Empirical Evidence from Lahore, Pakistan," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(1), pages 1-23, December.
    4. Benedetto Barabino, 2018. "Automatic recognition of “low-quality” vehicles and bus stops in bus services," Public Transport, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 257-289, August.
    5. Rui Xiao & Guofeng Wang & Meng Wang, 2018. "Transportation Disadvantage and Neighborhood Sociodemographics: A Composite Indicator Approach to Examining Social Inequalities," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 137(1), pages 29-43, May.
    6. Duvarci, Yavuz & Yigitcanlar, Tan & Mizokami, Shoshi, 2015. "Transportation disadvantage impedance indexing: A methodological approach to reduce policy shortcomings," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 61-75.
    7. Hickman, Robin & Chen, Chia-Lin & Chow, Andy & Saxena, Sharad, 2015. "Improving interchanges in China: the experiential phenomenon," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 175-186.
    8. Link, Heike, 2019. "The impact of including service quality into efficiency analysis: The case of franchising regional rail passenger serves in Germany," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 284-300.
    9. Celik, Erkan & Aydin, Nezir & Gumus, Alev Taskin, 2014. "A multiattribute customer satisfaction evaluation approach for rail transit network: A real case study for Istanbul, Turkey," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 283-293.
    10. Zhang, Kai & Zhou, Kan & Zhang, Fangzhou, 2014. "Evaluating bus transit performance of Chinese cities: Developing an overall bus comfort model," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 105-112.
    11. Carreira, Rui & Patrício, Lia & Natal Jorge, Renato & Magee, Chris & Van Eikema Hommes, Qi, 2013. "Towards a holistic approach to the travel experience: A qualitative study of bus transportation," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 233-243.
    12. Luis A. Guzman & Victor A. Cantillo-Garcia & Julian Arellana & Olga L. Sarmiento, 2023. "User expectations and perceptions towards new public transport infrastructure: evaluating a cable car in Bogotá," Transportation, Springer, vol. 50(3), pages 751-771, June.
    13. Echaniz, Eneko & Ho, Chinh Q. & Rodriguez, Andres & dell'Olio, Luigi, 2019. "Comparing best-worst and ordered logit approaches for user satisfaction in transit services," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 752-769.
    14. Tiglao, Noriel Christopher C. & De Veyra, Janna M. & Tolentino, Niki Jon Y. & Tacderas, Mark Angelo Y., 2020. "The perception of service quality among paratransit users in Metro Manila using structural equations modelling (SEM) approach," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    15. Francisco Benita, 2019. "A New Measure of Transport Disadvantage for the Developing World Using Free Smartphone Data," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 145(1), pages 415-435, August.
    16. Wan, Dan & Kamga, Camille & Liu, Jun & Sugiura, Aaron & Beaton, Eric B., 2016. "Rider perception of a “light” Bus Rapid Transit system - The New York City Select Bus Service," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 41-55.
    17. Ni, Anning & Zhang, Chunqin & Hu, Yuting & Lu, Weite & Li, Hongwei, 2020. "Influence mechanism of the corporate image on passenger satisfaction with public transport in China," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 54-65.
    18. Ganji, S.S. & Ahangar, A.N. & Awasthi, Anjali & Jamshidi Bandari, Smaneh, 2021. "Psychological analysis of intercity bus passenger satisfaction using Q methodology," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 345-363.
    19. Shreya Das & Debapratim Pandit, 2013. "Importance of user perception in evaluating level of service for bus transit for a developing country like India: a review," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(4), pages 402-420, July.
    20. Pyrialakou, V. Dimitra & Gkritza, Konstantina & Fricker, Jon D., 2016. "Accessibility, mobility, and realized travel behavior: Assessing transport disadvantage from a policy perspective," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 252-269.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:13:p:7314-:d:585518. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.