If Only Public Transport, It Will Not Reduce Traffic Jam
The Jakarta Urban Transport Policy and Implementation Study in 2011 showed in 2002, 14 percent of total trips made by private car. In 2010, this figure reduce to 9 percent.
This means that Jakarta residents who travel by private car is getting reduced – when compared to other modes of transportation. But that does not mean a smaller number. Because as an increasing number of trip, 9 percent of cars in 2010 increased of 14 percent in 2002.
What about a public bus? Same time, decreased as well. Than 40 percent (in 2002) to around 20 percent (in 2010). Thus increase occurs on motorcycles. In 2002, the numbers were still 20 percent but surged in 2010, twice as much as 40 percent.
When we talk to a traffic jam, this is obviously the cause of the crash. That is 9 percent of trips by private cars — which caused disruption to all others. Is 9 percent was high?
Let’s compare. In New York City, a private car to take 29 percent of total travel. 33 percent in Singapore. Tokyo 12 percent while Warsaw 34 percent. The percentage of citizens who use private cars in cities was much higher than the Jakarta!
In the meantime, the use of public transport in New York City, taking 55 percent of total travel. 44 percent Singapore, Tokyo and Warsaw, 51 percent (highest in the world) of 60 percent.
It seems the issue rather than simply the use of public transport instead of private cars, versus cases total journey that continues to increase.
When public transport in Jakarta to be priority for transporting the 9 percent, of course the cost of transports will be very expensive. Without subsidies, it may not be affordable for citizens who are 91 percent of the rest.
Hope that number continues to decrease private car use is daydreaming and misdirected. With conditions as they are now, hoping that the increased use of public transport is also a dream bulging. Should be reduced is a growing number of trip. Especially the ones with the car.
How severe is the growth of trips in Jakarta? As an illustration, the number of trips from outside of Jakarta to the city center, from 1985 to 2002, has increased by 10 (ten) times. Most certainly by car.
Therefore, spatial and individual automotive policy is important. Just order the city layout can arrange for trips that require reduced car. Imagine if people went to work to a place that is not too far away, which is affordable without a car.
In the meantime, car ownership and usage need to be costly.
It is true that the ratio between roads and cars in low Jakarta. But that does not necessarily mean that the road should be added. Therefore, it could also useless car.
If roads developing continuously, wouldn’t it be filled continuously? And isn’t it also will mean constantly dwindling land (and when the road was built to compile) the city for other purposes, including fresh air and the view into the sky?
The subject because, adding infrastructure will not finish in a sustainable solution; because it will continue to be exceeded after each period of time. This is analogous to the problem of flooding. Add a constant stream of water infrastructures, without restoring natural absorbing/hold more water, will end up with a fully developed infrastructure that, again and again.
Build the infrastructure that is just treating the symptoms, such as aspirin, not solve the root of the problem.
- Editorial staff:
- Press contact:
- Advertising information: