Route Marker 1- Objectives & Plans:
What objectives and plans have been agreed by the IPT industry and public authorities?
It is evident from the TRANSITIONS research that there are numerous potential causes of mis-trust between public authorities and the IPT sector. These can include a combination of factors that accumulate over time, including: differing political alignment; a perception that governments wish to eliminate the sector; a perceived ‘imposition’ of regulations and major public transport schemes, with limited consultation; a lack of enforcement of existing regulations and/or corruption; a lack of transparency of cash-based businesses; illegal IPT operations, etc.
From the perspective of public authorities, there is a need to recognise the value and benefits the IPT sector delivers in terms of affordable mobility, employment, etc.; and the cost-effectiveness of working with the sector to overcome problems (e.g. air pollution, road safety).
This should be undertaken to take into account the comparative costs of alternative options. For the IPT sector itself, there is an opportunity to benefit from improved infrastructure and vehicle investment opportunities, while also providing more stable income and long-term job prospects for the workforce.
We have suggested that these Steps could form the basis of a pilot project within a city. In the context of large metropolitan areas with diverse informal transport operators, it would be necessary to shape a collaboration amongst relevant stakeholders for a suitable scale and geographic area, such as a selected mobility corridor. This needs to be undertaken taking into account the areas of overlap and competition amongst IPT unions/associations and the degree to which ‘illegal’ (non-licensed) operations occur.
For further background information please see:
You can also download the questionnaire template below and work on the answers with your colleagues!