MRR No 327 - A Review of Recent Developments in Bus Rapid Transit System - V6 - Upload - Compressed

MRR No.
327
A Review of Recent Developments

in Bus Rapid Transit System
Afiqah Omar
Fauziana Lamin
Kak D Wing
Ahmad Noor Syukri Zainal Abidin
Mohd Rasid Osman
Khairil Anwar Abu Kassim
A Review of Recent Developments in Bus Rapid
Transit System
Afiqah Omar
Fauziana Lamin
Kak D Wing
Ahmad Noor Syukri Zainal Abidin
Mohd Rasid Osman
Khairil Anwar Abu Kassim
_______________________________________________________________________________________
©MIROS, 2020. All Rights Reserved.
Published by:
Malaysian Institute of Road Safety Research (MIROS)
Lot 125-135, Jalan TKS 1, Taman Kajang Sentral,
43000 Kajang, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia.
Perpustakaan Negara Malaysia Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
Afiqah Omar
A Review of Recent Development in Bus Rapid Transit System / Afiqah Omar,
Fauziana Lamin, Kak D Wing, Ahmad Noor Syukri Zainal Abidin, Mohd Rasid
Osman, Khairil Anwar Abu Kassim.
(Research Report ; MRR No. 327)
ISBN 978-967-2078-74-6
1. Bus rapid transit--Research--Malaysia.
2. Urban transportation--Research--Malaysia.
3. Government publications--Malaysia
I. Fauziana Lamin. II. Kak D Wing.
III. Ahmad Noor Syukri Zainal Abidin. IV. Mohd Rasid Osman.
V. Khairil Anwar Abu Kassim. VI. Title. VII. Series.
388.413220720595
Printed by:
Malaysian Institute of Road Safety Research (MIROS)
Typeface: Calibri
Size: 11 pt.
DISCLAIMER
None of the materials provided in this report may be used, reproduced or transmitted, in any form or by
any means, electronic or mechanical, including recording or the use of any information storage and retrieval
system, without written permission from MIROS. Any conclusion and opinions in this report may be subject
to reevaluation in the event of any forthcoming additional information or investigations.
A Review of Recent Developments in Bus Rapid Transit System
Contents
_______________________________________________________________________
Page
List of Tables vii

List of Figures viii
List of Abbreviations x
Acknowledgements xi
Abstract xiii
1. Introduction 1
1.1 Scope and Objectives of the Study 3
1.2 Limitation of the Study 4
1.3 Methodology of the Study 4
2. Literature Review 5
2.1 BRT Features 5
2.1.1 Dedicated Running Way 6
2.1.2 Stations 7
2.1.3 Pre Board Fare Collections 7
2.1.4 The Usage of ITS 8
2.1.5 Operation Speed 8
2.1.6 Cost 9
2.1.7 Type of Vehicles 9
2.2 BRT vs Light Rail 10
2.3 Successful Implementation of BRT 12
2.3.1 Cost 13
2.3.2 Transit Ridership 13
2.3.3 Travel Time 16
iii
2.3.4 Reliability 17
2.3.5 Flexibility 19
2.3.6 Employment 20
2.3.7 Environmental Impacts 20
2.3.8 Land Development and Property Values 22
2.4 Effects of BRT in Road Safety 23
2.5 Challenges in Implementing BRT 26
2.5.1 Planning Issues before the Implementation of BRT 27
and Poor Management
2.5.2 Political Interference 28
2.5.3 Poor Adaptation to Local Context 30
2.5.4 Lack of Communication 30
2.5.5 Road Safety Issues 31
2.5.6 Fare 32
2.5.7 Connection to Low Wealth Households 32
2.5.8 System Long Viability 33
3. Methods 35
3.1 Sampling Method 35
4. Data Analysis 36
4.1 Road Crash Overview in Malaysia 36
4.2 Population in Malaysia 43
4.3 Traffic Growth in Malaysia 44
4.4 BRT Implementation in Malaysia 46
4.4.1 Application of ITS Technology in the BRT System 48
4.4.2 Ridership 49
4.4.3 Service Frequency 49
4.4.4 Fare Structure 49
4.4.5 Operating Speed 49
4.4.6 Capital Cost 50
4.4.7 Operating Cost 50
iv
4.5 BRT Observation 51

4.5.1 Travel Time 51
4.5.2 Gender 52
4.5.3 Number by Age 52
4.5.4 Weekdays Usage by Time 55
4.5.5 BRT Usage by Days 55
4.5.6 Peak vs Non-Peak 56
4.5.7 Station 58
4.5.8 Weather 58
5. Discussion 60
6. Conclusions 66
References 68
v

List of Tables
Page
Table 1 Motor vehicles involved in road accidents by type of vehicle, 38

2011 – 2013
Table 2 Fare structure for BRT Sunway (Source: NST, 2015) 50
Table 3 Maximum travel time by BRT and private vehicles 51
vii
List of Figures
Page
Figure 1 Number of road death by road user category (Source: RMP, 2013) 37
Figure 2 Total motor vehicles involved in road crashes by type of vehicle 37
(Source: RMP, 2013)
Figure 3 Injuries and deaths by type of public vehicles from 2011 to 2013 39
Figure 4 Public vehicles fatality by type of roads from 2011 – 2013 39
Figure 5 Number of injuries and deaths involving taxi and stage bus from 41
2011 – 2013
Figure 6 Number of injuries and deaths involving taxi and stage bus in 43
municipal road from 2011 – 2013
Figure 7 Number of registered vehicles in Malaysia from 2005 to 2015 45
Figure 8 Total cumulative of new registration of motor vehicles in Malaysia 46
by state and type of vehicle until 2015
Figure 9 BRT multi-level parking facilities (a) ladies parking (b) real-time 47
information
Figure 10 BRT Sunway route and station (Source: Google Maps) 48
Figure 11 Gender variation of users 52
Figure 12 Percentage age of BRT users by age 53
Figure 13 Accessible same level platform and lifts facilities provided 54
Figure 14 Handrail and guidance pathways along the station 54
Figure 15 Average BRT passengers per hour by time period (Weekdays, 55
0700 to 1900 hrs)
Figure 16 Average BRT users by days and hours (Weekdays, 1000 to 1400 hrs) 56
Figure 17 Average BRT passengers per hour during peak and non-peak 57
period (Weekdays)
Figure 18 Average BRT passengers per hour for peak and non-peak period 57
(Weekdays)
viii
Figure 19 Percentage of BRT users ascending and descending by station 58

(Weekdays)
Figure 20 Average BRT users per hour by weather (Weekdays) 59
ix
List of Abbreviations
BRT Bus Rapid Transit
LRT Light Rail Transit
ITS Intelligent Technology System
ITDP Institute for Transportation & Development Policy
GTP Government Transformation Plan
MRT Mass Rapid Transit
KTM Keretapi Tanah Melayu
PM10 Particulate Matter less than 10µm
PM2.5 Particulate Matter less than 2.5µm
RMP Royal Malay Police
KKR Ministry of Works Malaysia
TSP Transit Signal Priority
SBS Select Bus Services
ppm Parts per million
x
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to express our sincerest appreciation to the previous Director-
General of the Malaysian Institute of Road Safety Research (MIROS), Professor Dr Wong
Shaw Voon and the former Director of Vehicle Safety and Biomechanics Research
Centre, Ir Mohd Rasid Osman for providing the grant in conducting this project entitled
“A Review of Recent Developments in Bus Rapid Transit System” and extending their full
support in producing this report. Our deepest gratitude also goes to Nor Idayu, a
practical student from UPSI who was involved actively from the beginning of data
collection and data analysis. The authors would also like to express special thanks to
members of the Crash Reconstruction Unit for their help and contribution in completing
the project.
xi

Abstract
The first Bus Rapid Transit system in Malaysia was implemented in the south-eastern
suburbs of Petaling Jaya, Selangor and has been launched to the public since June 2015.
The objective of this study is to evaluate the potential of BRT implementation in
Malaysia. This report summarizes into the literature review of current BRT systems in
other cities, the safety performance of public vehicles in Malaysia, field visit and data
collection followed by suggestions for improvement in the BRT system in Malaysia. The
results show that 84% of road accidents in Malaysia involved private vehicles, and
among public vehicles, taxi recorded the highest number of accidents. From the
observation, it can be seen that the travel time of BRT is reliable and consistent, male-
female ratio of BRT users is 1.06, 90% of the users are aged between 15 to 64 years old,
0.2% of the users observed are disabled persons and the highest average passenger is
detected during afternoon peak period. During the period of the study, the system is still
struggling to achieve predicted ridership. Until May 2017, the number of ridership is
reported around 6000 a day, where the earlier forecast predicted ridership of 2,400
passengers per hour. Nevertheless, continuous efforts need to be strategized in order
to promote the system and future attempts on the extension should be carried out to
generate a sustainable public transport system.
xiii

1. Introduction
An excellent public transport system contributes positive impacts to the country,
community and most importantly individuals. Jenks and Jones (2010) traces city’s
transportation system as one of the elements involved in forming sustainable city. In
accordance with the eleventh Malaysia plan, the public transport system will be
transformed towards energy efficient vehicles, with the purpose of providing better
services to the residents and improving accessibility. The improvement of public vehicle
has become one of the country’s priorities in order to reduce number of private vehicles
on the road, improve traffic conditions and providing sustainable transport service
(Pojani & Stead, 2015).
Public transport connects one place to another with the cheaper option, boost property
values, reduce the number of private vehicles on road and help employers to enlarge
their workforces. It merges as one of the sustainable alternatives to the private vehicle
in addition to cycling and walking. The advance merit of technology has pushed forward
the improvement of the system efficiency in order to cater to people demands for
accessibility, enhance present quality and creating sustainable transport practice.
However, in some countries, the bad reputation of public transit particularly buses
encourage people to travel by private rather than public vehicles. The non-popularity of
bus services is related to issues such as less reliability and accessibility, inconvenience,
time-consuming and safety problems.
Economic growth and rapid urbanization in Malaysia over the past decades has risen the
needs of travel by an individual. However, the inefficiency of public transport services
has led Malaysians to choose private vehicle over public transport. Factors influencing
the popularity of private vehicles include spatial distribution of population, government
policy, auto vehicle financing, household and travel characteristics (Mohd Shariff, 2012).
Surveys such as that conducted by Ponrahono (2016) shows that more than half of urban
and rural bus passengers are currently not satisfied with the quality of bus services.
1
Dahalan et al. (2015) focuses on the youth opinion of public transport in Klang valley and
found that their level of confidence in the quality of public transport was only moderate,
urging for enhancement on service quality. In another study, Lin et al. (2017) discuss that
while urban growth encourages high CO2 emissions from the transport sector, the
problems can be tackled through technological improvements in transportation.
In the 1970s, Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system has been introduced in North America as
an enhancement from regular bus services. The concept of cost-effective transit solution
to cater high population growth has make the system popular around the world (Wright,
2003). Institute for Transportation & Development Policy (ITDP) defines BRT as a high-
quality bus-based transit system that delivers fast, comfortable and cost-effective
services at metro-level capacities. While a variety of definitions of the term BRT have
been suggested, BRT is describing as an upgraded bus features with the purpose of
achieving the efficiency of rail. The features of BRT mimic the one used in rail system,
and with lower investment costs, the system is targeted to become more reliable and
convenient compared to regular bus services. BRT is increasingly recognised as a
sustainable solution to mobility issues, since the system desired low air and noise
emission vehicles (Zimmerman & Levinson, 2004). The system is upgraded through the
provision of segregated right-of-way infrastructure and off-board fare collections, in
addition to rapid and frequent operations. The features are further discussed in section
2.
Despite its benefits and efficacy, BRT implementation suffers from several major
drawbacks in certain countries. It is to be noted that the urban characteristics of each
country differ, especially when comparing the situation in Latin America and South East
Asia. In certain cases, there is increasing concern that the implementation of BRT is being
disadvantaged due to extremely high volume resulted in overcrowded while in other
cases, the managements struggle to promote the system resulting in low ridership. In
addition, different respondents have a different expectation on the performance level
of public transport. All of the matters should be noted by BRT operators, in order to
ensure the system viability in the long term.
2
The BRT system in Malaysia has grown in importance in light of recent development of
BRT Sunway line. The operation has started since June 2015. It is part of the government
effort under the Government Transformation Programme, GTP 1.0 and GTP 2.0 to
improve urban public transport. Most studies related to public transport in Malaysia
have only been carried out on bus generally, without much details in the BRT system.
This study systematically reviews the existence of research on BRT implementation
worldwide, aiming to understand the existence and future implementations of BRT in
Malaysia. Recent developments in BRT have raised the need for understanding BRT
concepts. As Malaysia is keen to adopt BRT system as part of the public transport system,
this report is important in order to understand the performance of Sunway BRT and as
reference for future planning on expansion of the corridor. Other than a thorough report
by Azizan et al. (2016), to the author’s best knowledge, there is no in-depth study
provided on the implementation of BRT in Malaysia. The study will help decision makers
and practitioners to understand the issues and challenges related to the development
of BRT, issues that are rarely addressed in Malaysia.
1.1 Scope and Objectives of the Study
General objective:
• To evaluate the potential of Bus Rapid Transit implementation
Specific objectives:
• To analyse the safety performance of public transport, particularly bus.

• To assess public utilization of BRT system.
• To identify the benefits of BRT system.
The outcomes of this study will provide greater understandings on BRT system and with
the expectation that by addressing them, it will help Malaysia in improving the current
system of public transportation. This study is structured as follows. The study starts with
a literature review of previous research in the BRT features, success and challenges in
the implementation of BRT and BRT roles in road safety. This is followed by an analysis
3
of the local BRT Sunway line. The results of the analysis are then presented followed by
summary and discussion on the findings, with suggestions on future areas of research.
This study provides an exciting opportunity to advance our knowledge on the challenges
of the implementing BRT and how to ensure the stability of BRT as one of the solutions
for public transport system deterioration.
1.2 Limitation of the Study
During the time of study, the Sunway BRT system had been in operation for only one
year, so any findings from this study are necessarily short term in nature, and would not
necessarily prospect the long run of the services. Secondly, the results on Sunway BRT
does not represent the whole BRT system in Malaysia, where future BRT implementation
in different districts or states may produce different results. The short-term results can
be used as a reference for potential successful future implementation.
1.3 Methodology of the Study
The study was broadly conducted in three (3) stages; literature review, field visit, data
collection and analysis followed by suggestions for improvement of the BRT system in
Malaysia. The literature review includes the BRT features, successful and challenges
during the implementation of BRT and the roles of BRT in road safety. The sample size
for primary survey was based on random sampling during peak and off-peak hours
during weekdays. Data collected during observation includes travel times, waiting and
access times, and boarding and alighting counts.
4
2. Literature Review
The BRT has become popular worldwide due to its similarity to rail features with lower
cost implementation compared to urban rail investment like metro and light rail train.
The focus of literature review is on the features of BRT that distinguish the system from
normal buses, success and challenges in the implementation of BRT and roles of BRT in
road safety.
2.1 BRT Features
The traditional arrangement of the bus transport system is always perceived as a low-
cost service with wide range of coverage. Nonetheless, this low-cost bus services have a
bad reputation on an excessive number of buses, insufficient vehicle capacity, high
average age of vehicles, poor vehicle and infrastructure maintenance and long routes
with a low number of ridership. A lot of countries have experienced the same issues and
traditional bus services are often labelled as crowded, slow and non-reliable.
Nowadays, the perception of local bus services has been gradually changed since a few
countries such as Brazil and Columbia have successfully transformed the local bus
service with BRT system. The BRT system model of Curitiba, Brazil has become an ideal
role model for the world. As an option with lower cost as compared to Light Rail Transit
(LRT), more and more countries have developed their BRT system in their cities.
More features are introduced into the BRT system such as dedicated running ways,
special stations and terminals, off-vehicle fare collections, use of Intelligent Technology
System (ITS) and frequent all-day service, which can increase the ridership and shorten
travelling time between stations. These features are slightly different between those
cities integrating the BRT system.
5
In this section, a preliminary study is conducted on the BRT system in different countries
through reviewing established BRT system assessment reports. The new unique features
that integrated into the BRT system have led to the successes of the bus transport
system.
2.1.1 Dedicated Running Way
In the BRT system, the running ways are different depends on the city public transport
system. The variants of BRT running ways are median dedicated arterial busway, bus
tunnels, curb bus lanes, mixed traffic lanes or guided bus system. The network of running
ways of BRT system is generally radial and extended through the city centre. Hidalgo and
Gutierrez (2013) reported that the element of separate right of way that distinguished
high end and low-quality BRT services.
In North America and Australian cities, the BRT system normally adopted independent
busway into their BRT system. On the other hand, South America cities such as Curitiba,
Bogota and Quito, and some European countries used arterial median busways as the
primary running ways for their buses in the BRT system. In Brisbane and Seattle, the
cities use bus tunnels to connect the BRT network as a measure to overcome congestion
traffic in city centre areas.
The typical width of the bus lane is in between 3.3 to 3.6 meter (Levinson et al., 2003).
The width of the bus lane is widened in bus station to 15 m for providing sufficient space
to express bus in overtaking buses stopping at the station. In Canada, the Ottawa Transit
way provides two 4 m lanes with 2.4 m shoulder. A 22 m envelope is employed in the
bus station (Levinson et al., 2003). On the other hand, the BRT system of Curitiba used
7 m width for their arterial median busway. In Curitiba’s system, wider space is provided
in bus station area where the width is 22 m to 26 m (Levinson et al., 2003).
The concept of dedicated running way can segregate the buses from other motor
vehicles, which can reduce the conflict between these vehicles. The efficiency of BRT
system has led to the switch of using automobiles to riding public buses. This
phenomenon can result to reduction in crash risk because the risk of crash occurrence
6
for bus is significantly lower than passenger vehicles. In Seattle, accident involving buses
has 40% fewer accidents in dedicated bus runway than mixed traffic operations
(Levinson et al., 2003).
2.1.2 Stations
The stations of BRT system are designed for the ease of passenger to board and alight
bus. In Curitiba, Bogota and Quito, the BRT system provides high platforms to allow level
boarding and alighting of passengers from high floor vehicles. Thus, passengers do not
need to climb up the staircase while boarding buses which can provide accessibility to
disabled passengers.
A typical BRT station is usually designed with sufficient platform length to accommodate
two to three buses. In some higher passenger volume stations, additional platform
length is provided to enable four to five buses to stop at the stations at the same time.
In Boston, the platform length of the station is 67 m which is sufficient to accommodate
three 18 m articulated buses at the same time (Levinson et al., 2003). This enable the
bus station to handle high number of passenger’s flow during peak hour. On average, a
BRT system can handle 3000 to 13,000 passengers per hour per direction (Hidalgo &
Graftieaux, 2008).
In Brisbane and Ottawa, overhead pedestrian walks are provided to connect to the
opposite sides of the stations. Pedestrians can cross the road without exposing
themselves to crash risk. In addition, barriers are installed in the median to prevent
passenger crossing to the opposite stations. Facilities such as shelters, benches and real-
time passenger information were provided in the station for customers’ comfortability
and journey planning.
2.1.3 Pre Board Fare Collections
Having fares paid before entering the bus reduces the long delays that accompany on-
board payment. Pre boarding payment has been identified to reduce boarding time of
7
bus passengers (Fernandez, 2011). By removing the handling of cash by drivers, the
incidence of on-board robbery is reduced. Furthermore, by having an open and
transparent fare collection system, there is less opportunity for individuals to withhold
funds.
2.1.4 The Usage of ITS
One of the interesting features of BRT system is the usage of ITS to shorten travelling
time through traffic signal preference. Traffic signal timing priorities allows special buses
to get up to 10 seconds of addition green time at a signalized junction (Levinson et al.,
2003). These special features are included in the BRT system of Cleveland, Los Angeles,
Vancouver and Rouen. The extension of the green time for buses can only be used once
per cycle at some main junction. Nonetheless, some of the ITS features may not be able
to effectively decrease the travelling time. In South Miami, the bus signal pre-emption
system for buses was removed due to increasing number of accidents involving buses
(Levinson et al., 2003). Thus, inclusion of the usage of ITS shall be tested
comprehensively before it can be used widely in the BRT system.
2.1.5 Operation Speed
The operating speed of the buses in the BRT system increased significantly as compared
to automobiles and traditional bus service. In the region of South America, on average,
the operating speed of buses in the BRT system is between 14 km/h (Quito) and 26 km/h
(Bogota) (Hidalgo & Graftieaux, 2008). In the United States and Canada, the operation
speed is slightly lower which is in between 12 km/h and 22 km/h at arterial streets in
New York City and Wilshire Boulevard respectively (Levinson et al., 2003). On freeway
lanes, the bus speed can go up to 64 km/h to 80 km/h. Even so, the overall operating
speed of the BRT speed can be considered as low and has minimum crash risk.
8
2.1.6 Cost
The cost of the BRT system varies depending on the features, location and complexity of
construction. The capital cost of a BRT system can be as low as US$1.35 million per km
in Jakarta or as high as US$8.2 million per km in Bogota (Hidalgo & Graftieaux, 2008).
With only minor physical improvement to the roadway, the cost is between US$1.35
million per km and US$3.50 million per km (Hidalgo & Graftieaux, 2008). However, the
capital cost increased by two to three times while major reconstruction works and wider
lanes are required, where the cost can increase up to US$8.2 million per km.
In comparison with the capital cost of LRT per km, the capital cost of BRT system is
significantly lower. The capital cost of LRT system ranges from US$16.3 million per km
to $24.6 million per km, in which it is three times more expensive than the BRT system
(Tegnér, 2003). The operating cost of BRT system at Pittsburgh is US$0.52 per passenger
trip on average (Levinson et al., 2003). However, the average cost per passenger for LRT
in Pittsburgh, Buffalo, Portland, Sacramento and San Diego is US$1.31, which is two (2)
times higher than the operation cost of BRT system.
2.1.7 Type of Vehicles
BRT needs to have a unique identity in order to differentiate the attributes to local bus
system. Specialized vehicles are used to speed up the journey time. One of the attractive
features in BRT is the application of low emission vehicle technologies. In addition, the
features of vehicle priorities ease access for physically disadvantaged groups such as
children, elderly and physically disabled. Usually, BRT vehicles are lengthier than
conventional buses to serve higher capacities, have low floors and multiple wide doors
to ease boarding. Fernandez (2011) found that wider door buses with pre boarding
payment will reduce boarding time by nearly double. Standard choice of 12 m coaches
is used in BRT services (VTA, 2007), with addition of 18 m articulated bus and 24 m length
of bi-articulated fitted in high volume areas. Several vehicle types are used in Curitiba
to feed passenger; bi-articulated bus with five sets of doors can carry up to 270
passengers, articulated bus for 160 passengers while conventional bus can carry 90
9
passengers (Lindau et al., 2010). With the purpose of distinguishing BRT with regular
buses, BRT contains distinctive logos, colour schemes, shapes and other visual elements.
2.2 BRT vs Light Rail
Despite the criticisms of BRT providing less similar performance compared to light rail,
the popularity of the system remains high. Currently, the BRT system has been operated
in 205 cities all over the world, carrying 34,176,952 passengers per day (BRTdata.org).
BRT has been popular as an enhancement from previous conventional buses with an
ability to imitate the features and performance of light rail. Before BRT, several attempts
have been made to upgrade the overall bus performance had met with several
challenges and lead to failure in implementation. In contrary to light rail, bus services
suffer bad reputation due to several factors such as traffic congestion, weather,
passenger loading variations, non-reliability and operation staff behaviour (Chen et al.,
2009).
BRT has been categorized as mass transit, since the system is competitive in
performance, with addition of flexibility. Previous studies have revealed that the
attractiveness of BRT lies on the system that are cost-effective and providing high-
performance transit service (Currie & Delbosc, 2011; Wright & Hook, 2007; Campbell,
2009). Wright and Hook (2007) stated that the BRT typically cost four (4) to 20 times less
than a light rail system and 10 to 100 times less than a metro system. Similarly, Suzuki
et al. (2003) found that metro systems can cost 10 times compared to BRT with similar
length, while light rail costs more than four (4) times as expensive. Wright (2011) found
that the costs of high-quality BRT in seven developing countries range from US$4 million
to US$7 million per kilometre, while the LRT system in three countries ranges between
US$ 15 million to US$40 million. BRT is suitable as an intermediate solution for cities that
are seeking affordable solutions for upgrading the current transport system. BRT has
been referred to as second best after rail even though there were growing evidence of
the cost effectiveness. One of the reasons is the lower costs of BRT generates lower
passenger carrying capacities and slower speeds compare to light rail (Cervero, 2013).
10
Another advantage of BRT compared to light rail is on the flexibility of the system and
the progressive deployment of the system. Hess et al. (2005) describe BRT flexibility as
the ability to accumulatively improve BRT system components over time. In another
study, Deng and Nelson (2011) describe the flexibility of BRT as having the potential to
share the same utilities with light rail transit systems and correspondingly, allow
conventional bus services to access BRT infrastructure. In addition, BRT operators may
adjust the operation hours and route to cater changing travel demands of the local
people. Evidently, Cambridge and Adelaide guided bus systems fully utilized the
combination of mixed traffic, by serving larger areas than LRT through off-track feeder
route (Hodgson et al., 2012). As BRT carries less passenger capacity than light rail, BRT
operator may decide to provide less operation in off-peak hours in order to minimize
pollution.
The progressive deployment of BRT system has been reported by several studies
(Hidalgo & Gratieaux, 2008; Feye et al., 2014). The examples can be seen in TransJakarta
BRT, where the first corridor was built in eight months period, from the design stage
until the opening (Hook & Ernst, 2005). In Beijing, the first BRT corridor took around 18
months to be built from the concept to a functioning system (Darido, 2006). Istanbul
BRT opened the first corridor in 2007, followed by the second phase in 2008, the third
phase in 2009 and the last phase was fully operated in 2012. The planning and
implementation of Bogota BRT take less than three years to complete (Hidalgo et al.,
2014). It is important to note that the progressive deployment was achieved through
active participation from local authorities and relevant institutions. Several BRT
operations have been greatly delayed due to unforeseen circumstances.
In a previous study, Vincent and Jeraam (2006) found that BRT generally emits less
carbon dioxide than LRT vehicles due to the use of cleaner fuels. In a study conducted
by Hodgson et al. (2013), it was found that light rail tram produces higher annual CO2
emission per vehicle compared to the guided bus. However, it should be taken into
serious consideration that the guided buses per vehicle provide lower passenger
capacity compared to light rail tram. Puchalsky (2005) analyze the emission from light
rail and BRT and found that light rail consistently produces fewer emissions of NOx,
volatile organic compounds and CO compared to BRT. Furthermore, the author found
11
that CNG buses that produce good NOx emissions generate higher emissions of other
pollutants. Nevertheless, both systems have shown an improvement over time.
In reviewing the literature, there are inconsistent results in which systems provide the
best solution to current public transportation demands. It is important to note that both
light rail and BRT plays an important role in connecting people around medium,
suburban and central business district area. Cervero (2013) discussed the strain in
comparing between BRT and rail systems since both have different designs, carrying
capacities, impacts on urban development and the like. It can be seen from the above
review that mixtures of light rail and BRT should be fully utilized to form greater
transportation system responding to rapidly changing mobility needs (Levinson et al.,
2003). Moreover, rail perceived higher benefits to community compare to other public
transport services. People have been attracted to rail due to its sleek design, faster and
provide reliable services. While there were lots of benefits on rail-based transport
systems, high capital cost, inadequate regional coverage and subsequent operation cost
associated with these modes have limited its development in many budget constraint
cities.
2.3 Successful Implementation of BRT
BRT is popular as a solution for relieving traffic problems and reducing transportation
emissions. The popularity of the system was inspired by the successful implementation
in the cities such as Curitiba and Bogota. BRT systems are ranked by the Institute for
Transportation & Development Policy (ITDP) based on selected criteria, as an evaluation
of their performance based on international best practises. During this period of study,
the best services are ranking as gold and awarded to Yichang BRT, Move Brazil, and
Transmilenio Bogota. Metrobus Buenos Aires, Metrobus Mexico City, Rea Vaya
Johannesburg, CTfastrak Hartford and Rainbow BRT Pimpri-Chinchwad are awarded
silver rank. It is important to ensure that BRT is capable of a high-quality system to
provide alternative treatments to other modes of transportation. In segment 2.3.1 to
2.3.8, the author will discuss further on the benefits of BRT system on selected cities
after the implementation.
12
2.3.1 Cost
Several articles on BRT pays particular attention to the cost benefits of BRT compared to
other rail systems. Low-cost investment of BRT can be perceived through the
development of infrastructure, equipment, operational improvement and technology.
In 2001, a report by U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that the average
cost per mile of BRT is less than half of the average cost per mile for LRT (Hess et al.,
2005). Hess et al. (2005) further investigated the costs of BRT implementations in North
America by three (3) types of bus running ways. The findings show BRT services in
arterial streets cost substantially cheaper than BRT services in high occupancy vehicle
(HOV) lanes or on dedicated busways, with total cost (per mile) range from $190,000 up
to $280,000. Collectively, these studies outline a critical role in improving the efficiency
of public transportation rather than building a new one. A report by the Research and
Innovation Technology Administration (RITA) reported that transit signal priority (TSP)
costs between $8000 and $35000 per intersection. By contrast, the cost for new light
rail lines typically ranges between $50 – $100 million per mile, and the costs for new
heavy rail lines may be $200 million per mile or more (FTA, 2010).
Another study by Rogat et al. (2015) shows that BRT systems in Latin America have been
delivered at a cost of between US$1 million and US$5.3 million per kilometre, compared
to rail-based metro systems costing between US$50 million and US$320 million per
kilometre. The comparison between light rail and guided bus cost in Reading, UK was
studied by Paul et al. (2013). According to Capital Expenditure (CAPEX) cost, the project
cost amount for light rail is the highest with £308 million, followed by Phileas Guided
bus with £216 million and for DE60LF Guided-bus is £198 million. In Indonesia, the
development of 12.9 km TransJakarta BRT first corridor takes around nine months to
complete, with the actual cost closer to $500,000 per kilometre.
2.3.2 Transit Ridership
Full-featured BRT system can offer higher passenger capacity, with reliable and
comfortable service than conventional bus (Deng & Nelson, 2013). Theoretically, the
13
improvements of BRT system should attract more passenger compared to conventional

bus services. A large and growing body of literature has investigated the increasing
ridership on public transport after the implementation of BRT. Analysis of the elements
on the BRT system that influence high and increasing ridership was carried out by Currie
(2011). The study suggests that higher ridership occurred when the bus system has
shorter stop spacing (larger number of stations and high frequency), longer weekday
service spans, and high shares of segregated right of way. Moreover, increasing service
levels on weekdays will moderately influence service effectiveness, but the case is
different with increasing service levels across the entire week.
The demand for Transmilenio BRT increased sharply from 14,000 passengers per day in
December 2000 to 1.7 million in 2013 (Hidalgo et al., 2013). The volume of passengers
transported per kilometre of trunk service reached 19408 in 2009, covering
approximately 99% of the estimated productivity estimated in the original plan
(CONPES, 2000). After seven months of operation, Metro Orange Line has attracted
21,828 average weekday boarding, exceeding the number of ridership in Gold Line light
rail (Vincent, 2007). The effect was immediate since Orange Line offers lower charge
than light rail, high ridership through articulated bus and provide a high frequency of
trips. Interestingly, the Orange Line bus has drawn 17% new rider to ride the system.
Alpkokin and Ergun (2012) reported that Metrobus Istanbul generates a maximum
observed ridership of 620000 passengers per day in 2011, with the highest number of
62423 passengers during morning peak hour. The shift of ridership to Metrobus Istanbul
comes from buses (70%), followed by intermediate forms of public transportation (9%)
and private cars (9%). This is partly due to removal of conventional buses and other
intermediate forms of public transports from using Metrobus corridor. In 2004, during
the implementation of first corridor of TransJakarta, the daily ridership measured more
than 60,000 (Ernst, 2005). In a study conducted by the Japan International Cooperation
Agency (JICA) during the first month of TransJakarta BRT operation, the shift or ridership
from private motorized vehicles is reported around 20 %.
In an analysis of BRT system in China, Zhang et al. (2013) report that Guangzhou BRT has
the highest average ridership of all Asian BRT systems with 805,000 passengers per day.
14
BRT system in Jinan, Xiamen, Changzhou, Hangzhou and Beijing attracts an average
passenger volume of 220,000 to 310,000 passengers per day. Deng and Nelson (2012)
studied the change in travel behaviour of Beijing Southern Axis BRT Line 1 customers
and found that the %age of modal shift from the private car is 12.4%, which is an
encouraging number since vehicle ownership in Beijing is lesser than many European
countries. More than half of the respondents (52.3%) choose BRT over their own car
because BRT was more convenient for their journey. Moreover, BRT was also found to
attract new trips (Deng & Nelson, 2012).
A study by Thole and Samus (2009) explores the development of BRT systems in six (6)
cities in the United States. After the implementation of BRT features in Metro Rapid Los
Angeles, ridership in Line 720 Wilshire/Whittier Blvd. corridor increased by 33%, while
in The Ventura Blvd corridor, ridership increased by 26%. The Transitway in Ottawa
attracted approximately 15 to 20% more riders than a conventional bus on local routes.
The first BRT system in Boston, the Silver Line BRT is being implemented through three
(3) phases. Phase 1 corridor resulted in 95% increase in ridership within the past year
(Thole & Samus, 2009). The opening of Phase 2 includes approximately one mile of the
trip in the tunnel, and the transit ridership has increased by nearly 100%. Furthermore,
the first BRT Select Bus Service (SBS) corridor opened in New York City, has shown a
positive result with a ridership increased by 7% from October 2007 to October 2008.
Other phases opened across Manhattan has an average weekday ridership of 9,164
passengers.
Approximately half of the people in India travelled by public transport (50%), followed
by non-motorized transport (30%) and 20% by personal motorized vehicles (Tiwari &
Jain, 2012). The average daily ridership of Ahmedabad BRTS is 135,000, with maximum
load point (per peak direction per peak hour volume) of 2000 per hour. Delhi BRTS has
average daily ridership around 85,000 with maximum load point (per peak direction per
peak hour volume) of 10,000 per hour (Kumar et al., 2011). Janmarg, the BRT services in
Ahmedabad is the first BRT system in India to achieve Silver rating (ITDP). Pathak and
Shukla (2015) reported that the ridership of Ahmedabad BRTS dramatically increased
from 18,000 trips per day to 0.1 million trips per day.
15
2.3.3 Travel Time
The exclusive lane of BRT has enhanced the quality of travel time by bus. Particularly,
major complain on bus services emphasize on the unknown journey time related to
irregularities of bus arrival and traffic congestion. In some cases, even though the bus
has arrived at the station, the passengers need to queue to pay for bus tickets and wait
for the bus to load with more people before the bus departs. One of the advantages of
BRT system includes minimize travel and waiting time through dedicated lanes, off-
board collection and intelligent transportation system. Moreover, Passenger
Information System displays around the station and on-board help passengers to plan
their trip. Bus with express routes can skip several stations and reduce travel time for
some passengers.
An analysis of the BRT by Peak et al. (2005) compares the effect of different BRT systems
implementation in the United States. When compared with the previous system, AC
Transit in northern California reduced running time by 17 %. The MAX BRT system in Las
Vegas produced significantly shorter travel times than previous travel mode throughout
the day since the number of stops are reduced and higher operation speeds (Eugene et
al., 2005). Furthermore, a passenger survey conducted by Strategic Solutions for MAX
BRT system in March 2005 shows that 90.7% of the participants agreed that their travel
time with MAX BRT is faster, with around 40% responded that their travel time improved
by more than 15 minutes. In Los Angeles, Metro Rapid program introduced BRT
attributes like bus signal priority, low-floor bus, headway schedules, fewer stops and far-
side intersection location of station to existence bus. The positive results can be seen in
both corridors where Line 720 Wilshire/Whittier Blvd, travel times were reduced by 29%
while in The Ventura Blvd. line, travel times were reduced by 23% (Peak et al., 2005).
The implementation of BRTS in Ahmedabad had saved 20 – 30% travel time over each
corridor compare to the previous routes. Analysis done by Jaiswal et al. (2012) shows
that there is a reduction of total traffic composition on post-implementation on all the
corridors. This leads to the increment of the average speed along all corridors, with the
average speed improved between 3.5 to 10 km/h. As reported by Rogat el al. (2015), the
average speed on the BRT corridor during peak hours was 25 km per hour, faster than
16
the average speed of AMTS (municipal) buses, which during that time was 15 km per
hour. In Delhi BRTS, the passengers can experience approximately 30% reduction in
travel time. The implementation of the first BRT corridor in Jakarta was found to improve
travel time by 10 – 20 minutes compared to regular bus (Susilo et al., 2007). Joewono et
al. (2012) discuss the service quality of TransJakarta Busway, with 42.7% of respondents
in the first corridor use the busway due to faster trip.
One of the benefits of Metrobus BRT in Mexico is the reduction of travel time compared
to the previous trip before implementation. Between the northernmost and
southernmost terminals of Line 1, the travel time was decreased approximately 50 %
compared to previous, while the reduction of over 50% were found in Line 2 and Line 3
(Voukas, 2012; Francke et al., 2012). The average running speeds of bus were also
improved from 10 km/h to 20 km/h in Insurgentes (Line 1) corridor (ITDP, 2012). In
another case, Vaz and Venter (2012) found that the implementation of Rea Vaya BRT in
Johannesburg, South Africa produced significant benefits through the reduction of travel
time between 10% and 20% compared to previous travel modes.
2.3.4 Reliability
Most of the complaints on the existing bus system are due to the non-reliability and
frequency of the services. The investment done by cities like Lagos, Jakarta and
Ahmedabad on BRT is to further improve the previous uncoordinated private bus and
informal paratransit services (Hidalgo, 2013). Reliability requires both operator and
consumer perspectives on the respective transportation system. Under Transit Capacity
and Quality of Service Manual (3rd Edition), reliability from passenger’s perspective is
arriving at destination on time and acceptable waiting time for transit vehicle to arrive
at a stop or station. From the operator’s perspective, reliability impacts the schedule
recovery component of cycle time. According to Adewumi and Allopi (2014), reliability
in the service is the capability of the operators to provide a dependable level of service
and maintain operations as planned. The reliability of public transport is important in
order to ensure communities preference towards the systems.
17
Huo et al. (2014) found that mean headway and mean waiting time for Changzhou BRT
are quite minimal, around 3.12 – 3.96 minutes and 2.17 – 2.82 minutes respectively.
During morning and evening peak hours, mean waiting times are below 2.5 minutes.
From the operator’s perspective, the worst service reliability is around morning and
evening peak hours, but from the passenger’s perspective, it is during the early period
followed by the morning peak hours. In addition, the passengers need to allocate extra
3 – 5 minutes beyond their typical journeys to ensure 95% probability of arrival at the
destinations on time. The best service reliability is found near a route’s origin terminal,
the service deteriorates gradually along the route, before it then improved when
approaching the route’s end.
In another study, Flynn et al. (2011) found that implementation of the Metro Orange
Line in Los Angeles results in high reliable service both during peak and non-peak hours.
The ratio of peak to non-peak travel time of Orange Line is approximately 1.008, which
indicates insignificant variability between peak and non-peak periods. The consistency
was shown in the on schedule, with an average end-to-end deviation of only 32 seconds
compares to the time allocated in the schedule. Data gathered by Metro shows that a
small proportion of bus bunching (10%) occurred during the weekday peak period. On-
board survey done by National Bus Rapid Transit Institute (NBRTI) shows that 82.2% of
the participants indicated that the service reliability of Orange Line as either ‘good’ or
‘very good’.
Istanbul is one of the examples of cities with high directional capacity BRT. During peak
hours, the frequencies are as high as one bus per 45 seconds for the Istanbul Strait
crossing and 30 seconds for the European side section only (Alpkokin & Ergun, 2012).
Apart from the Bridge section, the Metrobus corridor has no signalling stops or
intersections for better travel time. The peak hour frequency at the maximum service
point is between 15-to 20-seconds intervals while during off-peak hour, the frequency
is within 45-to 60-seconds intervals all day (Yazici et al., 2013). Similarly, Deng and
Nelson (2012) reported that BRT Line 1 has already achieved a very high frequency, with
headway adherence of 1.5 min during peak and 2 – 3 min during off-peak.
18
A comparison between Australians BRT systems shows high service level including
service spans and headways (Currie, 2006). The largest system, Brisbane South East
Busway have high service levels with peak headways of 24 seconds. Adelaide Northeast
Busway deployed high volume of articulated buses and guided bus technology. These
results in buses operate in high and safe operating speeds and few stations reducing
stop dwell time (Currie, 2006). In comparison, Sydney Liverpool-Parramatta Transit way
has modest service levels between 10 to 20 minutes because only the trunk element of
the service plan is provided.
2.3.5 Flexibility
One of the advantages of BRT over rail services is the flexibility of the system to deal
with shifting travel patterns. The system is continuously improved with the intention to
put more and more people close to a transit corridor. For example, BRT routes can be
altered based on the feedback by users, such as in the case of MTA BRT in Los Angeles.
In the case of implementation of BRT in Ahmedabad, the initial plan was to adopt
curbside stops, but the plan was altered to a central island bus stop with dual sided
boarding in order to save costs and facilitating transfers (AMC, 2007). Other
improvements in Ahmedabad includes moving of bus stop locations from junctions to
improve flow, relocating lighting from bus median to the curb, and increasing the widths
of pedestrians and cycle paths (AMC, 2007; Rizvi & Sclar, 2014).
Furthermore, BRT can be operated by phase, rather than having to wait for an entire
system to be built. The design of Ahmedabad BRT Phase 2 begins after the construction
of Phase 1 has commenced (Rizvi & Sclar, 2014). The first phase introduced the pilot
corridor of 12.5 km, before gradually launched the remainder corridor in length of 5 –
10 km to retain momentum (Pai & Hidalgo, 2009; Rizvi & Sclar, 2014). In December 2004,
BRT1 in Beijing, China started the operation through pilot line of 5.5 km in length, and
after one year, BRT1 began full operations with extension of 15.8 km length (Nikitas &
Karlsson, 2015). The construction of BRT in some cases are faster compared to the
construction of LRT. The first corridor of TransJakarta BRT was implemented within eight
months from the design stage until the opening (Hook & Ernst, 2005).
19
The features of rubber-tired allow BRT to operate in a wide range of environments, and
this is important in order to meet the travel demands of local people. The BRT system
can operate within mixed traffic modes, with the advantages of traffic signal technology.
For Istanbul Metrobus BRT, bus operates in dedicated right-of-way except for the mixed
traffic operations on the Bosphorus Bridge (Yazici et al., 2013). In addition, an open BRT
system allows existing bus routes to be included in the system and allows conventional
bus to enter the system (Kathuria et al., 2016). Moreover, BRT can share the existence
infrastructure sections place for Light Rail Transit in order to create smooth
interconnection (Nikitas & Karlsson, 2015).
2.3.6 Employment
Even though the traditional bus has been eliminated, there is an encouraging trend in
the employment balance in TransMilenio. A net figure between 1900 and 2900
permanent jobs in operations and between 1400 to 1800 jobs per month in construction
were provided after the implementation (Hidalgo et al., 2013). According to Kang (2010),
the implementation of BRT in Seoul attracted super creative industries (professional,
scientific and technical services; educational services) and increased employment
density. The matter is associated with a higher land value that can be afforded by this
working group. In a different study, Nelson et al. (2013) analyzed Eugene-Springfield BRT
and found that there is a positive shift of jobs after the implementation of the system.
Sectors such as Retail Trade, Transportation and Warehousing, Finance and Insurance,
Real Estate and Rental & Leasing, and other services show a positive shift within 0.50
mile from BRT station.
2.3.7 Environmental Impacts
Transportation sector generates particles through exhaust emission of the vehicle and
vehicle-related particles that may affect the amount of particulate matter (PM10) in the
surrounding air (Nugroho et al., 2010). Several studies have revealed the positive
impacts of BRT in improving air quality. The relationship between the development and
environmental co-benefits investigated by Pathak and Shukla (2016) suggests that the
20
introduction of BRT and rail system can significantly modify transport energy demand in
the city, as the systems use lower energy per capita.
The positive impacts of TransJakarta BRT in improving air quality before and after the
implementation were discussed by several studies (Ernst, 2005; Nugroho et al., 2011). A
relationship exists between the modal shift from private to public modes with improving
air quality. In an early study reported by Ernst (2005), the perentage of BRT riders who
have switched from private motorized riders is around 20%. Nugroho et al. (2011)
reported that the modal shift influences the reduction on rapidly decaying pollutants
such as PM10. In a different study, Kogdenko (2011) determined that TransJakarta BRT
could contribute to 0.3 – 1.0% reduction of local emissions from Jakarta’s transportation
sector.
In an analysis of emission by BRT and conventional bus systems, Chen et al. (2012) found
that BRT buses produce fewer emissions of nitrogen, hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide
and particulate matter by 25.62 to 27.37% compared to conventional bus on the non-
bus lane. The result is the same for bus lane scenario, where BRT emissions are lower
around 12.76 to 14.00% compared to the conventional bus. Interestingly, both buses
emit lower emissions on exclusive bus lane due to a smooth trip. The highest emission
was captured near a station or stop, with BRT produce less emission around 22.94% to
37.25% compared to a conventional bus. This is because BRT vehicles tend to spend less
time in idling modes when they approach a station. It is worth to be noted that pollutants
emission is increasing with the increase in the age of the buses.
Metrobus BRT is built as part of the government effort to improve air quality in Mexico.
Chavez-Baeza and Sheinbaum-Pardo (2014) model of transport emission in Mexico City
Metropolitan Area shows that other than an electric vehicle, the modal shift from
private car trips to BRT significantly reduce air pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions.
Garcia (2011) reported that in the first six years of operation (2004 – 2011), emission
from Metrobus (gram/km per passenger) was reduced nine-fold compared to buses and
minibuses. To determine the effects of BRT in reducing emissions, Bel and Holst (2015)
compare the air polluting emissions before and after Metrobus implementation. The
results show reduction emission of carbon monoxide by 16.6 to 20.4%, nitrogen oxides
21
by 12.9 to 18.1%, particulate matter (PM2.5) by 20.8 – 39.0% and (PM10) by 9.6 to 24.4%
according to the city area.
After the implementation of Transmilenio BRT in Bogota, there is a reduction of sulphur

dioxide emissions by 43%, nitrogen oxide by 18% and particulate matter by 12% (Turner
et al., 2012). The reduction is prominent since previous conventional bus consumed
diesel fuel of more than 4,500 parts per million (ppm) of sulphur (Turner et al., 2012).
The pollution reduction was also benefited by Lagos, where the BRT project reduced the
CO2 emissions by 13% and greenhouse gas emissions by 20 % (Peltier-Thiberge, 2015).
Rogat et al. (2015) discuss that high capacity articulated bus with cleaner fuel and
improved fuel-efficient technology can replace four or five conventional buses.
Conventional bus emits relatively high levels of carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides,
particulate matters and carbon dioxide. In addition, the restructuring of facilities for
non-motorized transportation such as bicycle and pedestrian lane encouraged people to
shift their travel pattern. The shift helps in significantly reducing the fuel consumption
and levels of emissions. For example, Curitiba has resulted in a 25% reduction in fuel
consumption and related emission reductions (Rogat et al., 2009).
2.3.8 Land Development and Property Values
Rodriguez et al. (2015) investigated the land development impacts in Bogota and Quito
by comparing pre and post BRT implementation. The findings show heterogeneous
results and subject to the local context. Several areas that served BRT have significant
developments while in other cases, instances development was more limited. A survey
to local real estate agents found that the area around BRT line 1 in China has a high
profile within the local property market (Deng & Nelson, 2013). From the perspective of
customers, Deng and Nelson (2012) found that almost half of the respondents (49.5%)
were interested in living along BRT corridor. Furthermore, the hedonic price model
shows that asking prices of residential properties increased around 1.32 % to 1.39 %, for
every 100-m closer to the BRT station (Deng et al., 2015).
22
Thole and Samus (2009) reported in Ottawa, there is a significant rise on the share of
non-residential (33%) and residential (8%) development in the vicinity of rapid transit
stations between 1998 to 2002. Perk et al. (2013) found that there is a positive impact
between the distance to the Boston Silver Line BRT stations with residential prices. Jun
(2012) discusses that the introduction of BRT in Seoul increased the development
density in urban centres. In a recent study, Calvo (2017) founds that residential and
commercial properties in Bogota and Barranquila received positive impacts accorded by
the BRT system.
2.4 Effects of BRT in Road Safety
According to WHO Decade of Action for Road Safety 2011 – 2020, one of the effective
interventions for road safety includes promoting public transport. The implementation
of BRT gives positive impact to the city by reducing the frequency of traffic accidents,
injuries and fatalities. Several researchers have reported on the decreased of
automobile trip generation and vehicle motorised transportation (VMT) after the
implementation of BRT (Deng & Nelson, 2013; Ernst, 2005; Alpkokin & Ergun, 2012). As
per capita, traffic crash rates rise with per capita vehicle travel, implementing mobility
management strategies have a positive outcome in reducing overall crash risk (Litman &
Fitzroy, 2017). In addition, the lane-reduction conversions or “road diets”, which has
been practiced in several countries for BRT implementation, may have contributed to
the reduce in the number of vehicle-to-vehicle crash, by reducing vehicle speeds and
vehicle interactions during lane changes (Huang et al., 2002).
The operations of BRT which requires reduction of older public transport and bus
oversupply, adopting better driving practises, segregating buses and organizing the
boarding and alighting of passengers at stations help in improving road safety (Bocarejo
et al., 2012). Previous studies have reported that some of BRT design features such as
centre lane configurations, kerb side lane, improved geometric road surfaces, sidewalks
and road alignments, signalized mid-block pedestrian crossings with refuge islands and
restrictions of right turn or left turn (depending on countries), can significantly improve
road safety on the implemented corridors (Goh et al., 2014; Zhang, Liu & Wang, 2004;
23
Bocarejo et al., 2012; Duduta et al., 2013). BRT system provides larger station spaces to
reduce the interference between BRT and general traffic.
In a comparison study performed by Goh et al. (2014), it was found that the presence of
bus priority in Melbourne significantly reduces accident risks, specifically associated with
54% reduction in bus accident occurrence. In comparison between routes with and
without bus priority, the remarkable difference was found on the number of accidents
involving buses hitting stationary objects, where in bus priority routes, there is
approximately 70% drop recorded compare to routes without bus priority. In a similar
study involving police-reported data, Goh et al. (2013) found that there is approximately
14% reduction of police-reported injury, serious injury and fatality accidents counted
after implementation of bus priority lane in Melbourne.
Before the establishment of BRT in Johannesburg, South Africa, the minibus taxi was
dominating the public services industry. The industry is frequently associated with poor
road safety and the incidence of conflict and violence. Although taxis represent a very
small proportion (2 – 3%) of vehicles on South African roads, it involved around 17% of
road accident fatalities (Fourie, 2003). The problems are associated with factors such as
poorly maintained and aged vehicle fleets, lack of skills and appropriate training and high
cost of vehicle maintenance. After the implementation of Rea Vaya Phase 1A, the system
reported to save roughly $249 million from avoiding road fatalities (Embarq, 2013).
Besides that, a study done by Kolawole (2010) found that the rate of accident among
BRT buses in Lagos to be very low (0.000008) and rate of susceptibility of BRT passengers
is 0.000006 respectively.
In 2010, around 41% of vulnerable road users involved in road fatalities in India, while
for major cities, the vulnerable road users represent 54% of the road fatalities (NRCB,
2009). After the implementation of Delhi BRT, there is a downward trend on the number
of fatal accidents (Tiwari & Jain, 2015) along the corridor. Reports of four accidents
occurred on the BRT corridor after the operation, where the number reduces to two
accidents in 2009 after safety measures were implemented. Numbers of safety features
introduced along the corridor include; segregated lanes for bus, motorized vehicles and
non-motorized vehicles, pedestrian crossings and rumble strips on exclusive bus lane to
24
control speeds. The analysis shows that the safety of cyclists has been improved after
the implementation of BRT due to construction of segregated lanes for bicycles. While
the pedestrians still face risk of being hit, the greater risk comes from private vehicle
user compare to the bus. Further intervention needs to be introduced in order to
improve the safety of pedestrians. Tiwari and Jain (2012) identify that the evaluation of
Delhi-BRT shows the reduction in number of personal vehicle speed and delays at
junctions.
Jaiswal et al. (2012) compare the numbers of traffic crash occurred before (2007) and
after (2010) the implementation of BRTS in five (5) corridors of Ahmedabad. The results
show that the overall number of road crash dropped by 13.6%, with the number of fatal
crashes reduced by 18%. Rates of decline on the number of persons killed ranged from
11.1% to 44.4%, with the highest reduction were found in Corridor 1, from RTO to
Chandkheda. Furthermore, the number of people injured also shows positive declining
pattern, with an average of 12.1% reduction on the five (5) corridors studied. Factors
such as physically segregated road space for buses, bicycles, pedestrians and mixed
traffic with adequate lighting helps in improving road safety.
After the implementation of Metrobus in Istanbul, there has been a downward trend in
the number of accidents. Total of 1536 vehicles of intermediate forms of public
transportation was removed, 18 bus lines were cancelled, and 11 bus lines were
shortened after Metrobus operated (Alpkokin & Ergun, 2012; Yazici et al., 2013).
Through the utilization of fewer buses and dedicated lanes, the city traffic has achieved
approximately 64% reduction in accidents (IETT, 2011). In 2010, it was reported that only
five accidents with no injury involving Metrobus occurred, where two were caused by
the vehicles in the mixed traffic lane (Alpkokin & Ergun, 2012). It was further discussed
that the safety problems still happened due to the design limitation of maintaining the
number of lanes along the corridor which was also the cause of these two accidents.
By comparing the number of accidents in Transmilenio corridor between 1999 (without

BRT) and 2001 (with BRT), there was a drop of 89% in traffic accident fatalities and 75%
in traffic accident injuries, prior to a reduction of 79% in collisions (Sandoval & Hidalgo,
2004). An analysis by Bocarejo et al. (2012) on two corridors of Transmilenio found that
25
number of reported serious traffic accidents declined by more than half, while Bogota
as a whole city has a decreased of just over one-third. However, it was further reported
that new accident hotspots emerged especially in the areas with the greatest
improvement of private car infrastructure. The cost benefit analysis performed in 2012
by Embarq (Carrigan et al., 2013) indicates that fewer accidents after implementation of
Transmilenio contribute to $288 million of cost savings.
In 2012, a thorough study performed by Duduta et al. (2012) found that geometry of the
road plays an important role in road safety. A very large proportion (90%) of crashes on
BRT corridors and busways occurred outside the dedicated bus lanes and did not involve
buses. In his review of crash statistics on existing BRT and busway corridors, even though
pedestrian crashes represented only 7%, it is to be concerned that half of the fatality
cases involved pedestrians. Among the existence of busway design features, Duduta et
al. (2012) identify centre-lane systems as safer configuration compared to curb side
systems while counter flow lanes are perceived as the most dangerous possible
configuration. In another major study, Duduta et al. (2013) found that safety
countermeasures do have a positive impact on the system by fractionally reduce
operating speeds and improve travel times.
2.5 Challenges in Implementing BRT
Paradoxically, there are few examples of cities which faced difficulties of executing BRT
system, especially during the initial implementation. This chapter describes and
discusses the challenges faced by the cities in order to develop successful BRT systems.
However, it was worth noted that there are several cases where the flexibility of BRT
allows the system to improve from time to time. It takes great effort to identify the
problems and develop proper solutions.
26
2.5.1 Planning Issues before the Implementation of BRT and Poor

Management
Since bus system has been introduced for a long time, the planning and implementation
of BRT involved attention and action of different key groups and organisations in the
city, together with the national government (Wright, 2003). In 2010, Hidalgo and
Carrigan pointed out that several BRT systems suffer difficulties due to poor planning,
implementation and operation resulted from institutional and regulatory constraints.
Rizvi and Sclar (2014) discuss the importance of planning in the implementation of BRT
both in Delhi and Ahmedabad projects. Delhi BRT was the first BRT services introduced
in India but suffer lots of operational challenges compared to the successful Ahmedabad
BRT services. The issues highlighted during the planning of Delhi BRT includes delay in
designing process and deficient connection between the system with other public
transportation services. In the early implementation, there was massive congestion
comparatively due to lack of assessment and public education. The problems identified
listed as non-familiarity of bus driver with new traffic pattern, critical software and
hardware faults in the traffic signals, pedestrian jaywalking and lack of enforcement on
dedicated lane. Fare collection on board to conductor and waiting conventional public
transport buses at bus stop increase BRT dwell times, especially since there are no
passing lanes around them (Kumar et al., 2011).
In the case of Accra BRT report, planning and implementation of the projects were
divided into several institutions and there were remarkable problems regarding the
institutional arrangement (Feye et al., 2014). It generates unfavourable situation where
several agencies were burden with double responsibilities while others are not given
enough attention to the matter (Feye et al., 2014). Bangkok, the capital city of Thailand
has prepared to implement BRT since 2005, but the operation only started in 2010. The
planning process of Bangkok BRT involved dozens of organizations, results in similar
problems face by Accra BRT (Wu & Pojani, 2016). Furthermore, the bidding process for
the project was time consuming due to strict requirements by government and reports
of corruption (Wu & Pojani, 2016).
27
In the early planning of Johannesburg BRT, the project has been strongly opposed by
previous informal sector operators especially the informal sector and various types of
taxi service (Allen, 2011). Strong opposition from the taxi industry leads to two major
taxi strikes involving violent clashes (Allen, 2011). The BRT trial phase has been operated
since August 2009, but the negotiations between the city and affected taxi owners
continued for over a year (Carrigan et al., 2013). The implementation problems in first
phase of Transjakarta includes poor patronage and traffic congestion. It is due to lack of
integration between trunk and feeder vehicles, and the operation of ordinary public
buses are still running in the mixed traffic alongside the BRT system (Wright, 2011;
Joewono, 2012). In another case of BRT implementation, the authorities fail to maintain
an exclusive busway in critical portion in Beijing caused longer travel time for transit
customers (Wright, 2011).
It was reported that Transantiago BRT in Chile suffers several hiccups during its early
implementation due to institutional shortcomings where the previous operators
guaranteed subsidies before operating, thus results in poor and deteriorating services
(Cervero, 2013). Munoz and Gshwneder (2008) listed lacked expertise working on the
system as one of the causes on the initial failure of Transantiago BRT. In a similar case in
Quito BRT, the decisions to give full responsibilities of fare transactions to the
consortium caused the local authorities not being able to assess the system’s financial
status thus lead to unpaid government loans (Cervero, 2013). In Cali, Colombia the
planning and implementation of BRT has been primarily focused on infrastructure rather
than operational and institutional issues (Hidalgo & Diaz, 2014). The main issue during
the delay of BRT implementation in Cali is highly related to institutional management
(Hidalgo, 2013).
2.5.2 Political Interference
Lack of political commitment and participation has been listed by the evaluation team
from The World Bank as a high-risk factor for Accra BRT project (Feye et al., 2014). Weak
political supports were also reported in other cities such as Cali (Hidalgo, 2013) and
Bangkok (Wu & Pojani, 2016). Hidalgo and King (2014) reported that between 1995-
28
2012, the city of Cali had 8 different mayors, with three of them suspended due to
alleged mismanagement and criminal issues. There will be a high risk of incomplete
project implementation when elections empower a new mayor from an opposing
political party (La Republica, 2013; Lindau et al., 2014).
In Chile, the resignation of Minister of Public Works, Transport and Telecommunication

after the bidding process caused several changes in the initial plan and delay on the
implementation of Transantiago BRT (Munoz & Gshwender, 2008). The decision by new
appointed Ministry to paid operator based on their reference demand caused reduction
of quality service by operator due to guaranteed income. Furthermore, the decision for
flat integrated fare leads to operational deficit (Munoz & Ortuzar, 2009). A statement by
Chile’s Treasury minister claimed that the failure on the implementation of Transantiago
was due to cutting off funding for busways, in order to accommodate the metro and
freeway projects (Munoz & PagetSeekins, 2016). Overall, Munoz and Gshwender (2008)
listed lack of political leadership interest combined with unclear institutional design in
transportation sector as factors led to numerous difficulties during the implementation
of the project.
During the earlier years, there are great difficulties of reforming public transport services
in Brasilia, since the city has been centred to be automobile-based mobility, together
with lack of interests by the appointed governors (Aragao et al., 2016). The author
further highlighted that the issue with BRT network in Brasilia is, the route does not
cover overall bus network, as the existing network is an inefficient result of gradual
addition of lines along the decades, provoked by pressures by several groups of interests
and politicians in territorial control. In another case, there were contractual issues
reported during the implementation of Phase 3 Transmilenio, which includes corruption
scandal (Hidalgo & King, 2014). Mallqui and Pojani (2017) discuss that the discrepancy
of ideas between municipal and state authorities who have control of the Brisbane
transportation system caused the delay in the extension of BRT projects.
29
2.5.3 Poor Adaptation to Local Context
While Transmilenio in Bogota has emerged as one of the best BRT systems around the
world, the case is not the same on the other five (5) cities in Colombia. As the projects
followed accordingly as implemented in Bogota systems, there were no additional
improvements introduced based on local context, which may be subjected to lack of
technical and financial capacities compared to the Transmilenio. Ex-post assessments
have shown that the projects suffer cost overruns and lower demand (Bocarejo et al.,
2014). It has been highlighted by the author that following Bogota’s example too closely
without considering local context proved unsuccessful. In another study, Joewono
(2012) found that the operator of other corridors was not able to replicate the quality
or provide better quality than that of first corridor. Hence, the success implementation
varies even among cities within the same country (Rizvi & Sclar, 2014).
2.5.4 Lack of Communication
Several studies have addressed the lack of communication as one of the factors
contributing to the delay of BRT implementation. The communication and networking
with all stakeholders and the citizens during BRT planning and implementation are
important in order to inform them about the intentions and progress of the project and
getting feedback in turn (Wright & Hook, 2007).
The decision to exclude the previous operators of the old public transportation system
during the initial planning has created additional problems in Accra and Johannesburg
BRT. In Accra, the special interest groups that operate the old system consider the BRT
system as their enemy, since they were not invited to participate during planning and
implementation (Feye et al., 2014). Furthermore, the communication with residents and
stakeholders were not taken place at the beginning, since there was no institutional
assigned to take the role (Feye et al., 2014). Johannesburg suffers several delays in
implementing BRT due to strong opposition from informal private shared ride taxi
industry. In comparison, Lagos had avoided the problem by complementing the informal
sector on board at the early stages of implementation of BRT system (Kumar et al.,
30
2011). The problem lays on the lack of communications and approach to stakeholders
during planning.
For Delhi BRT, there was the delay on communication efforts, where instead of
promoting the system, it focusses on troubleshooting and mitigating protests. The
projects received strong opposition both from private vehicle owners and traffic police
as the cause of congestion and safety problems (Kumar et al., 2011). In Vijayawada, the
project was initially delayed due to opposition disagreement by political representatives
(Ponnaluri, 2011). Since part of BRT system involved dedicating roadway space
previously available to other vehicles, continuous communication is important to
educate people and reflected their concerns in planning and design (Kumar et al., 2011).
It was reported by Munoz and Gshwender (2008) that since the government decided not
to publicize the details of the system until it is ready, there were missing elements of
public participation during the planning of Transantiago BRT.
2.5.5 Road Safety Issues
Even though BRT has been related to improving road safety, the case is different
according to the place it’s operated. There are cases where the reduction of crash in BRT
corridor increased the risk of crash on the nearby streets (Embarg, Duduta). In the case
around BRT system, the most reported accident occur is pedestrian crash. The causes of
the problem are related to higher flow of pedestrian around stations (Bocarejo et al.,
2012), higher speed in mixed traffic (Bocarejo et al., 2012) and people cross in non-
authorized place (Deng & Nelson, 2013).
As Rogat et al. (2015) point out, there is another contentious issue in Ahmedabad
regarding the sharing of the road space. The design features limited access for
pedestrian and cyclists since the footpaths and cycle tracks have not been designed and
built along all corridors. The segregated cycle tracks cover only a quarter of the
operational corridor. Furthermore, the author highlighted the issues on the design and
maintenance of the non-motorized infrastructure. A study by Duduna et al. (2012) found
that while the implementation of BRT in Guadalajara shows a positive reduction on the
31
number of crashes in BRT corridor, the highest number of crashes recorded was during
the construction of BRT. The finding suggests that significant improvement should be
monitored during the construction phase.
2.5.6 Fare
The purpose of implementing BRT is to solve the transportation problem in the cities.
Even though some BRT projects aim in shifting private mode users to use public
transport, the solution should not hinder the existing user of public transport system,
especially due to high fares. The fare and system design can limit the mobility benefits
to the lowest-income residents.
Venter et al. (2013) reported that Rea Vaya BRT failed to improve the livelihood of the
poor due to its pricing scheme and focus on middle and higher income passengers. The
author further described that lower-income users prefer highly subsidized commuter
rail compare to BRT, even though BRT provides faster and more reliable service. In the
case of Transantiago, it was reported by Munoz et al. (2014) that high fare evasion has
been observed in bus services, which one (1) of the reasons may be due to the increased
of fares by 50% in the last three years.
Most successful BRT like in Bogota does not receive any subsidy from the government
and used a fixed fare system. In order to ensure that the fare can cover the operational
cost of the system, the management also needs to consider the poorest and vulnerable
groups of the society.
2.5.7 Connection to Low Wealth Households
Aragao et al. (2016) identified one of the shortcomings of BRT experience in Brazil is the
poor integration with the overall bus network, resulting in awkward feeder services
compare to the previous system. BRT system network in Brazil tends to focus in city
centres while sub-standard bus systems are served in peripheral areas (Vasconcellos,
2016). In a study conducted by Hernandez and Davila (2016), they found that
32
transportation services in the city of Soacha, a municipality adjacent to Bogota have

limited access to residents and the quality of the services are considerably low. This is
disappointing since 85.1% of the trips from Soacha were made by public transport
services. A report by Inter-American Development Bank (2016) found that BRT in Lima
has lower coverage in poor areas due to low-quality of road infrastructure, while in Cali,
poor neighbourhoods in the western side of the city received less coverage of BRT
services compare to the eastern portions.
2.5.8 System Long Viability
After a decade of the TransMilenio’s opening, Bogota is facing a new set of challenges,
caused by uncoordinated urban expansion (sprawl), traffic congestion, deteriorating
TransMilenio services that are not keeping up with demand and maintenance issues of
exclusive busways (Bassett & Marpillero, 2012). The decline in service quality reflects
both the system’s popularity and the lack of attention to user needs. Between 2007 and
2008, ridership increased by 10.3% (135,292 passengers), but the number of buses
increased by only 2.2% (Hidalgo, 2010). Before 2011, there was no expansion occurred
on the main corridors even though the ridership steadily increased over the years. This
cause overcrowded and passengers have to wait longer for buses serving busiest lines.
Another problem rises as people choose private vehicle to avoid overcrowded, resulting
in worse traffic congestion in Bogota. The period between 2003 and 2008 saw dramatic
growth in the number of private car ownership, with a 12.3% annual increase and almost
no increase in roadway capacity (SDP, 2010). Paget-Seekins (2015) reported that there
were protests by the riders in 2012 and March 2014, due to the issues of overcrowded
of BRT buses in Bogota.
Hidalgo (2013) reported that Transmilenio in Bogota has received positive feedback at
the start of operation, but the level of satisfaction has generally decreased. It is difficult
to maintain high quality service with the increment of passengers and volumes increase
and equipment ages, as in the case of Bogota’ Transmilenio (Gilbert, 2008). Bocarejo and
Oviedo (2012) reported that low income individuals of Bogota spend 40% more time and
38% more money traveling to and from work than they would like to spend. The inability
33
of TransJakarta to control bus dwell times at stops and passage through intersections
leads to service variability problems and bunching (Kumar et al., 2011).
34
3. Methods
The public transport vehicle accident data is analysed in terms of frequency and pattern
from 2011 to 2013 by crash type and location. The data comes from various sources,
with the main sources come from Malaysian Royal Police Departments (RMP). Other
sources include Malaysian Institute of Road Safety Research (MIROS), Road Transport
Department (JPJ), Ministry of Works Malaysia (KKR), Department of Statistics Malaysia
and World Health Organization (WHO) reports.
3.1 Sampling Method
To carry out this study a weekday public transport commute sample is carried out in
each BRT stations. At the time of the study, Sunway BRT is the only BRT implements and
fully functional in Malaysia, operated with a length of 5.5 km, connected between Setia
Jaya and USJ 7. To determine travel and waiting times, field measurements are carried
out that makes it possible to estimate these variables. The measurement consists of
travel time by passenger car and BRT at first point to the last points of the route. Travel
time by passenger cars was estimated using ‘Google Maps’ during peak and non-peak
periods.
In this study, we used boarding alighting surveys. The counts were used on the number
of persons ascended and descended from the bus at each BRT Sunway bus stations,
where the observer was seated within the bus. As the BRT Sunway buses featured only
one door, only one observer was placed near the door on each trip. The observer records
the number of passengers that have boarded and alighted at each stop along with the
time of arrival. Data collection was conducted on weekdays from 0700 to 1900 hrs and
divided into peak and off-peak period. In overall, 620 data were collected during the
observation.
35
4. Data Analysis
This study investigates road crash involving public vehicles in Malaysia, particularly
looking into the following elements; population in Malaysia, number of vehicles
registered in Malaysia, BRT implementation in Malaysia and observation on BRT Sunway.
There are eight parameters observed namely; travel time, gender, age, weekdays usage
by time, weekdays usage by days, peak and non-peak period, station and weather.
4.1 Road Crash Overview in Malaysia
According to WHO Global Status Report on Road Safety 2015, Malaysia registered a
death rate of 24 per 100,000 populations and listed among the countries with a high
death rate per population in South-Eastern Asian countries after Thailand. The number
of deaths according to road user category in Malaysia is shown in Figure 1. In general,
more than half number of deaths involved motorcyclists. The four-wheeled cars and
light vehicles user represent almost a quarter of overall number while substantially, bus
and other mode represent a very small proportion. It is worth to note that Malaysia has
a very high proportion of private vehicles on the road, with motorcycle recorded 46%,
car recorded 45% while public vehicles only represent 0.9% from total cumulative of
newly registered motor vehicles (Road Transport Departments, 2013). The given pie
chart in Figure 2 represents the proportion of vehicles involved in the road crashes by
type of vehicles. In 2013, only 14% of motorcycles involved in the road crashes, as a large
proportion in road crashes involved passenger cars (70%) (RMP, 2013).
36
Figure 1 Number of road death by road user category (Source: RMP, 2013)
Figure 2 Total motor vehicles involved in road crashes by type of vehicle (Source: RMP, 2013)
There is a huge gap between the number of private and public vehicles user on the road
in Malaysia. Even though the number of public vehicles involved in the road accidents is
low, the crash rate per 100 buses involved in road accidents over other transport modes
is quite high especially comparing to passenger car and motorcycles. The details are
shown in Table 1. Between 2011 to 2013, the crash rate of buses is between 14 to 16
37
cases for every 100 registered buses. From the results, it can be seen that there are
urgencies in improving the current public vehicle systems especially buses in order to
reduce the road accidents rate involving public vehicles. Further analysis was conducted
in order to study the pattern of public vehicles involved in road accidents.
Figure 3 provides information on the number of injuries and deaths on road accident by
type of public vehicles in Malaysia from 2011 to 2013. In overall, taxis recorded the
highest number of injuries and death. This was followed by express bus, stage bus,
factory bus, school bus, excursion bus and school bus. Out of 595 taxis involved in the
road accident from 2011 to 2013, 211 involved fatal cases, 148 involved in serious
injuries and 236 were minor injuries cases. Express buses followed closely with 186 fatal
cases, 107 serious and 145 minor injuries cases while stage buses involved in 124 fatal
cases, 98 serious and 117 minor injuries cases. The mini bus recorded the lowest number
of road accident among other public vehicles. It is to be noted that Kuala Lumpur has
discontinued the mini bus services since 1 July 1998 to be replaced by bigger buses,
followed by other cities around Malaysia. The graph in Figure 4 illustrates public vehicles
fatality by type of roads from 2011 to 2013. Overall, the fatality cases in all of the roads
show an increment except for the cases involved in state and other roads. The highest
number of fatalities involving public vehicles occurred along federal roads, where the
cases increased almost double from 2011 to 2013. This was followed by municipal roads
with 25 cases in 2011, 46 cases in 2012 and 57 cases in 2013.
Table 1 Motor vehicles involved in road accidents by type of vehicle, 2011 – 2013
Buses Taxi Passenger car Motor

Crash rate per 100
Crash rate per 100
Crash rate per 100
Crash rate per 100

registered motor
registered taxi
registered bus
registered car
Year
Crash
Crash
Crash
2011 9,986 14.24 11197 12.39 546,702 5.66 129,017 1.29

2012 10,617 14.75 11680 12.15 655,813 6.36 130,080 1.24
2013 10,123 16.12 11651 11.67 636,602 6.04 121,700 1.10
38
Figure 3 Injuries and deaths by type of public vehicles from 2011 to 2013
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
2011 2012 2013
Expressway Federal State Municipal Other
Figure 4 Public vehicles fatality by type of roads from 2011 – 2013
39
Comparison between the number of injuries and death in accidents involving taxi and
stage bus were illustrated in Figure 5. The trend shows that the number of road injuries
and deaths are the highest for taxi compare to stage bus except in 2011. The reasons for
the significant change from 2011 pattern compare to 2012 and 2013 might be due to
the decrease demands on public bus services in Malaysia. As the number of registered
taxis increased by 10.5% from 2011 to 2013, the number of registered bus are reduced
by 10.4% between 2011 to 2013 (MOT, 2015). As current BRT corridor in Malaysia is
developed around city areas, the study highlighted the cases occurred along municipal
roads. In Figure 6, the difference between the number of accidents in municipal roads
between taxi and stage bus are discussed, with the results showing the similar pattern.
Except in 2011 where stage bus has higher fatality cases compares to taxi, taxi involved
in a higher number of fatal, serious and minor type of accidents compare to stage bus.
From this result, it can be seen that the risk of stage buses involved in accidents is lower
than taxi, especially in the municipal road.
40
Figure 5 Number of injuries and deaths involving taxi and stage bus from 2011 – 2013
41
42
Figure 6 Number of injuries and deaths involving taxi and stage bus in the municipal road from
2011 – 2013
4.2 Population in Malaysia
According to the Department of Statistics Malaysia, the number of Malaysians in 2016

estimates 31.7 million, with the highest population recorded in Selangor (19%). The
population growth by 1.5% compares to 2015. It is projected that by 2040, the number
of populations will increase up to 41.5 million (DOSM, 2016). More than half of the
population in 2016 (69.5%) is people aged 15 – 64 years, followed by people aged 0 – 14
year with 24.5% and 6.0% people aged 65 and above year. It was predicted that the
percentage of the total national population in Malaysia living in urban areas is 74%
(United Nation, 2014). Malaysia has enjoyed a steady increased in GDP per capita as
people move to cities. Steady increment of population, together with the development
of economy and rapid growth of the cities has led to an increase in travel demand.
In 2010 consensus published by the Department of Statistics Malaysia, Selangor was the
most populous state with 5.46 million people, second state with the higher growth rate
for the period of 2000 to 2010 and ranked fifth in terms of population density with 674
43
persons per square kilometre. In addition, Selangor recorded level of urbanisation of

91.4%, right after Kuala Lumpur and Putrajaya with 100 % level of urbanisation.
4.3 Traffic Growth in Malaysia
Number of vehicles has been gradually increasing in Malaysia, especially private

vehicles. This is largely due to the fast-growing urban population and the introduction
of local manufacturer vehicle. In 2005, the total number of vehicles registered was
14,736350 and in 2015 there was 26,301952 units vehicle registered, more than half
increment in only 10 years. Figure 7 shows that the increments were highly dominated
by motorcycle, followed closely by private car. Other significant changes are detected
on the number of hire car, where it was dramatically increased from 13,075 in 2005 to
63,885 in 2015. Within the time span of 10 years, as number of registered taxi increase
by 55%, number of registered buses only increased by 17 %. Ponrahono et al. (2017)
found that more than half of the respondents (60.4%) were dissatisfied with the current
public bus service in Malaysia. Rapid motorisation has caused heavy traffic congestion
and increasing number of road accidents. Furthermore, a high rise on number of private
ownerships also results in declining air quality and deterioration of public health.
The cumulative registered vehicle until 2015 by state and type of vehicle is shown in
Figure 8. Kuala Lumpur has the highest number of vehicles registered, where 24% of
private vehicles, 28% of bus and 59% of taxis are registered in Kuala Lumpur. It was
followed by Johor which represents 14% of the total volume of private vehicles, 13%
from the total volume of the bus and 9% of registered taxis. While Selangor has the
highest number of total registered vehicles compare to Pulau Pinang, Pulau Pinang
shares of private vehicles are slightly higher compare to Selangor. The lowest number of
registered vehicles is detected in Perlis, which represents only 0.4% than the total
cumulative registered vehicles in Malaysia.
High number of road traffic accidents occur in the place facing rapid pace of
urbanization. This was confirmed in Malaysia as in 2015, Selangor has the highest
number of road accidents followed by Johor, Kuala Lumpur and Pulau Pinang. Moreover,
44
the number of road accidents in Selangor was more than double compare to number of
road accidents in Johor. Regarding the total deaths caused by road accidents, the highest
number of road death occurred in Johor, followed by Selangor, Pahang and Kedah (RMP,
2015).
Figure 7 Number of registered vehicles in Malaysia from 2005 to 2015
45
70
x 100000
60
50
40
others
30 lorry & van
taxi+hire car
20
bus
10 PRIVATE VEHICLE
M n
re ka
Pi r
ng
Sa rak
r
nu
h
S e ng
Ke k
ge Pa h
Ke ilan
Pu elan r
s
l a go
pu
rli
a
a
da
ba
h
Te ela
w
na
nt
ri ha
ga
Pe
Pe
Jo
m
b
Sa
ra
la
m
ng
Lu
u
S
ala
Ku
Ne
.P
W
Figure 8 Total cumulative of new registration of motor vehicles in Malaysia by state and type
of vehicle until 2015
4.4 BRT Implementation in Malaysia
The BRT system is part of project under the National Key Result Areas scope to improve
public transport. Inspired by successful BRT systems all around the world, the first BRT
project in Malaysia is a collaboration works under the innovative Public-Private
Partnership (PPP) program between Prasarana Malaysia Berhad and Sunway Berhad
(Ram, 2015). The project which costs RM634 million is 70 per cent funded by Prasarana,
15 per cent by Sunway Bhd and the rest was by Public Private Partnership (UKAS), a unit
under the Prime Minister’s Department. The inspiration behind the improvement of
public transport is due to the congested situation and declining air quality in Malaysia.
The first BRT in Malaysia was implemented in the south eastern suburbs of Petaling Jaya,
Selangor. The 5.4 km bus corridor located along the line of Setia Jaya to USJ7 and
46
connected several areas in Bandar Sunway and Subang Jaya. The busway corridor is a
fully elevated from the normal traffic and consists of one carriageway with two lanes. It
is a closed system where the corridor access is limited to RapidKL bus only. The system
covers 5.4 km long-route with seven stations along the route and one parking facility.
The parking facility located in Monash station serves as the depot and provides 1153
parking bays for commuters, including 102 special slots for lady drivers (Figure 9a), 23
for handicapped group and 121 bays for motorcycles (“More BRT”, 2015;
“Construction”, 2014). The real-time information board placed in front of the building
(Figure 9b) updates the consumer on the current number of available parking bays. The
whole length covers residential areas, commercial activities, private institutional and
hospital. During the trial, BRT Sunway has been opened to the public for free of two (2)
months, before implying full fare starting 1 August 2015. Furthermore, Sunway-Setia
Jaya station is connected with KTM Setia Jaya while USJ 7 station directly connected to
LRT USJ 7. The Sunway Line has seven (7) stations along its 5.2 km corridor as illustrated
in Figure 10.
The project used 15 electric buses on dedicated lanes with close system. The buses were
purchased from China with a total cost of MYR 15 million (“investment on BRT”, 2016).
While the cost of electric bus is much higher than diesel bus, the maintenance cost is
significantly cheaper (Rosli, 2015). Total cost is MYR 634 million, with Sunway Berhad
contributed MYR123 million. The details of Sunway BRT were further discussed below.
Figure 9 BRT multi level parking facilities (a) ladies parking (b) real-time information
47
BRT route
BRT station
Figure 10 BRT Sunway route and station (Source: Google Maps)
4.4.1 Application of ITS Technology in the BRT System
Electronic Fare Payment system before boarding and real-time passenger information is
provided both at the station and inside the buses. The importance of the ITS is crucial in
order to segregate the BRT service with conventional buses.
48
4.4.2 Ridership
During the trial period of two months in 2015, the BRT Sunway has successfully attracted
13,000 people to ride the BRT. As the fare was introduced later, the number of
passengers dropped by more than half to 4,000 (Selva, 2016). The project failed to
consume initial projected ridership of 2400 per hour, since the ridership recorded in
August 2015 is only 256 per hour (Ong & Fong, 2016). According to Rapid KL website,
BRT Sunway Line has a daily ridership of 5382 passengers, and there is an increment by
almost 20 % after the opening of Kelana Jaya line (Lim, 2016).
4.4.3 Service Frequency
The BRT Sunway Line provides a Monday to Sunday services, running from 0600-2230
from Monday to Saturday, while for Sunday and public holiday station is closing at 2245.
According to RapidKL website, the service frequency is approximately four (4) minutes
interval during peak hour and 8 minutes interval during off-peak.
4.4.4 Fare Structure
The fare is calculated based on kilometre travelled. During the length of study, there is
a discount of 50% for passengers aboard and alighting from 6.00 am to 7.00 am. Children
below 7 can travel for free. Students, disabled persons and senior citizens are entitled
for discounts up to 50%, under the requirement that they need to fill the form and
submit it to concession counter.
4.4.5 Operating Speed
One of the advantages of Sunway BRT is the close system with elevated guideway
separated the bus from normal traffic. The speed limit of BRT is set as less than 40 km/h.
49
4.4.6 Capital Cost
In the initial plan, the cost estimation for BRT Sunway line was announced as RM300
million. After the project completed, the project cost announced was RM634 million
(Ong & Fong, 2016). At RM117.5 million per km (approximately US$30 million per km),
it is one of BRT system with high cost (Ong & Fong, 2016). As reported by EMBARQ
(2013), the capital cost for Trans Milenio BRT in Bogota is at US $12.5 million per km
while in neighbourhood country, Trans Jakarta capital cost is around US $1.4 million per
km (Carrigan et al., 2013).
4.4.7 Operating Cost
The fare structure of BRT was announced by SPAD as the maximum allowable fares for
BRT and the details are listed in Table 2. Majority of public opinions and medias reported
the fare as expensive compare to the fare of rail transit line (Selva, 2016; Sze, 2015; Noel,
2016).
Table 2 Fare structure for BRT Sunway (Source: NST, 2015)
KM travelled Cost (MYR)

Basic costs 0.90
First 6 km 0.815 per km
Next 6 km to 12 km 0.513 per km
Beyond 24 km 0.212 per km
50
4.5 BRT Observation
4.5.1 Travel Time
The travel time taken from BRT Setia Jaya to USJ 7 were compared between BRT and
private vehicle modes during peak and off-peak hours. The time taken in BRT was based
on maximum travel time taken during the survey while time taken using private vehicle
was based on maximum travel time estimates by Google Maps. The results were shown
in Table 3. While the time taken by BRT provides consistent results between off and on
peak hours (±2 min), the travel time taken using passenger cars varied depending on the
traffic condition. The worse condition is detected on Setia Jaya to USJ 7 route, where
during evening peak hours, people using private cars may take around 40 minutes to
arrive at the destination. From overall data collection, the mean travel time to arrive
from first to last station by BRT is approximately 14 minutes.
This result may be explained by the fact that as BRT travel on an exclusive lane, it can
avoid traffic congestion and offer faster and reliable services. By taking BRT, passengers
can reduce the travel time, especially during peak hours. However, passengers need to
spare around 20 up to 65% of their total trip time in order to wait for the bus to arrive
at the station. During the observation, the average travel time from station to station
takes around 2 to 3 minutes.
Table 3 Maximum travel time by BRT and private vehicles
Morning peak Afternoon peak Evening peak Off-peak

Station Mode
hours (max) hours (max) hours (max) hours (max)
USJ7 – BRT 17 min 16 min 18 min 17 min
Setia Jaya Private car 20 min 20 min 24 min 20 min
Setia Jaya BRT 15 min 15 min 15 min 16 min
– USJ7 Private car 24 min 20 min 40 min 20 min
51
4.5.2 Gender
From the graph bar in Figure 11, the number of male users is slightly higher than the
female. The result shows that BRT services are preferable regardless of gender, and
female users have confidence in the safety level of BRT. The male-female ration is found
as 1.06, which is similar to findings done by Deng and Nelson (2012), where the male-
female ratio is 1.18.
Figure 11 Gender variation of users
4.5.3 Number by Age
Based on the age structure published by the Department of Statistics Malaysia, the age
group is divided into 0 – 14 years old, 15 – 64 years old and 65 years above. The details
of the study are provided in Figure 12. The majority of BRT user is people aged 15 – 64
years old (90%), followed by those aged below 14 years old (8%) and people above 65
years old (1%). The observation on disabled person also represents 0.2% from total
respondents. Examples of facilities provided by the management for disabled person
52
were further highlighted in Figure 13 and Figure 14, where all of these passengers were
getting assisted by the staff during ascending and descending.
Figure 12 Percentage of BRT users by age
53
Figure 13 Accessible same level platform and lifts facilities provided
Figure 14 Handrail and guidance pathways along the station
54
4.5.4 Weekdays Usage by Time
The average number of BRT passengers per hour during weekdays were shown in Figure
15. It is apparent from the graph that the highest number of passengers are observed
during afternoon time, between 1200 to 1400 hrs. The second highest ridership was
spotted during evening peak period, from 1700 to 1900 hrs. The average ridership during
off peak period between 0900 to 1200 was 163 and between 1400 to 1700 hrs was 178
passengers per hour. Surprisingly, the lowest ridership was observed during morning
peak period, between 0700 to 0900 hrs.
Figure 15 Average BRT passengers per hour by time period (Weekdays, 0700 to 1900 hrs)
4.5.5 BRT Usage by Days
As discussed in previous result, the highest passengers are perceived during the
afternoon period. Figure 16 presents the average of BRT users by weekdays observed
from 1000 to 1400 hrs. From the graph, the highest number of passengers was detected
on Thursday, followed by Monday, Friday, Tuesday and the least number of passengers
were counted on Wednesday. Interestingly, Friday has the largest average number of
55
passengers per hour instead of Thursday. This was followed by Thursday, Monday,
Tuesday and Wednesday.
Figure 16 Average BRT users by days and hours (Weekdays, 1000 to 1400 hrs)
4.5.6 Peak vs Non-Peak
The particular graph in Figure 17 shows the difference in average BRT users per hour
during peak and non-peak period. When comparing peak and non-peak, the ratio
between passenger during the peak hour to off-peak hour is around 1.296. As the
reported in previous usage by time, the highest volume was detected during afternoon
time. Figure 18 illustrates the average number of passengers per hour during peak and
the non-peak period from Monday to Friday. To begin, BRT ridership on weekdays during
peak period is higher compare to the ridership during non-peak period. The highest
volume was observed on Friday, with 176 passengers per hour during peak, and 116
passengers per hour during non-peak. Next, the figures on Thursday shows near similar
amount of BRT passengers during peak and non-peak period. While the number of BRT
passengers in peak period on Monday is higher than the number on Thursday, there
were fewer passengers during the non-peak period. The lowest passengers observed
56
during peak hours are on Wednesday, whereas for the non-peak period, the lowest was
observed on Thursday.
Figure 17 Average BRT passengers per hour during peak and non-peak period (Weekdays)
Figure 18 Average BRT passengers per hour for peak and non-peak period (Weekdays)
57
4.5.7 Station
Boarding and alighting counts were used to recognize the popular Origin-Destination
station. The chart in Figure 19 illustrates the percentages of BRT passengers ascending
and descending by station during observation. Overall, USJ7 station recorded the highest
counts, with 37% of passengers ascended and 31% of passengers descended. The
pattern was followed by Sunway Setia, with the number of passengers descended was
higher (21%) than the number of passengers ascended (19%). Lagoon station also
recorded higher people descended (16%) compare to passengers ascended (10%).
Sunmed station has the smallest number of passengers ascended while Mentari
recorded the smallest number of passengers descended.
Figure 19 Percentage of BRT users ascending and descending by station (Weekdays)
4.5.8 Weather
Another element that has been observed is the number of passengers during different
weather, where three weather variables used were considered: good, overcast and
raining. Figure 20 highlights that the weather does affect the number of passengers, with
58
the greatest number of passengers were observed during overcast. There was a slight
decreased perceived in the number of BRT passengers during the raining period.
Figure 20 Average BRT users per hour by weather (Weekdays)
59
5. Discussion
With a high number of fatalities involving motorcycles and private vehicle in Malaysia,
there are lots of road safety measures that have been introduced and aimed to reduce
accidents involving death and serious injury. It has been conclusively shown that with
little protection and exposed body region, motorcycles have higher relative risk of fatal
crashes compare to passenger cars (Cheng et al., 2015; Li et al., 2008). Under Road Safety
Plan of Malaysia 2014 – 2020, one of the initiatives of risk reduction for motorcyclist is
by improvement in public transport safety. The authors found that while the number of
road accidents involved buses are small, the crash rate per 100 buses is quite high. From
the data, express buses recorded the highest fatality and injury rates. The findings are
consistent with those of Law (2017) who discussed that the express buses have a higher
risk for crashes due to long hours of driving and exposure to different road conditions
and from their observation, west coast road environments in Malaysia are less risky
compare to the east coast, the bus running speed is higher than the allowable speed
limit and there was high usage of mobile phone during driving.
A comparison between the type of public vehicles from 2011 to 2013 shows that taxi
recorded the highest number of injuries and deaths due to road accidents and injuries,
followed by express bus and stage buses. In 2013, municipal roads recorded as the third
highest number of fatal accidents, after federal and state roads (MOT, 2013). However,
fatality accidents involving public vehicles are higher in municipal roads for 2012 and
2013 compare to state roads. As BRT is part of stage bus, a further comparison was
analysed between taxi and existence stage bus before the introduction of BRT. From
2011 to 2013, the number of fatality accidents involved taxi increased significantly and
except in 2011, the taxi has the highest fatality and injuries accidents compare to stage
bus, including accidents occurred in municipality roads.
The introduction of BRT may assist in reducing the number of accident and fatality rate
involving bus in the cities. Several features of BRT such as controlled bus speed limit,
60
exclusive and segregated lane, systematic drivers’ management, and the restructure of
existence bus may enhance current public transport services. A study by Useche et al.
(2017) found that BRT drivers likely to exhibit lower stress, burnout and health problems
compare to urban bus operators, which significantly associated with the risk of being
involved in accidents (Gopalakrishnan, 2012). As an example, in Istanbul, the authorities
manage to downsize the existence bus from 209 buses and 1296 minibuses to 350 BRT
buses (Yazici et al., 2013). Overall, 18 existence lines were cancelled, and 11 lines were
shortened in order to accommodate the operation of BRT.
There is an upward trend of private vehicle registrations, highly driven from the rapid
economic growth and urbanization in Malaysia. FTS (2011) emphasized that the key of
introducing sustainable transport must be in line with broad concept of improving
people’s welfare through reliable, safe and affordable transport service that nurture the
environment and can be sustained over time. According to Onn et al. (2014), private
share modes in Klang represents 83% of the trips, particularly comprise of single
occupancy vehicles. Explosive increment in the number of private vehicles is worrisome
since it results in serious traffic problem. In an analysis of travelling behaviour in
Putrajaya by Borhan et al. (2011), it was found that people unwilling to use public
transport due to poor service frequency, and longer waiting time up to 30 minutes.
Similarly, Ismail and Hashim (2015) found that factors discouraging public transport in
Putrajaya are highly due to desirable routes not covered by public transport and lack of
bus frequency. Surveys such as that conducted by Onn et al. (2014) have shown that
accessibility distance to station, transit time and travel time are the significant factors in
attracting people to ride public transports. The high reliability and introduction of
intelligent transportation system in BRT may help people to generate positive
perception toward public transport and thus, encourage mode shifting.
An understanding of the attitudes and behaviours of commuters is an essential condition

for the development of an effective transportation system intended to encourage more
efficient use of the city’s public transportation system. The results from the observation
on Sunway BRT shows that the travel time of BRT is consistent and provide faster option
during congestion periods. A study by Wan et al. (2016) found that frequency, on-time
performance and speed play an important role in gradually increase overall satisfaction
61
of BRT passengers. Currie and Delbosc (2011) identify that segregated right of way has
a positive impact on ridership. In another study, Chakrabarti (2016) highlighted that
transit’s speed in comparison to private vehicle plays a significant role in determining
the transit mode choice. The study further noted that although congestion level and
non-reliability are not the major factors for people to shift to transit, continuous
improvement in transit service can attract higher travel demand. This situation can be
seen when RapidKL opened the Kelana Jaya LRT station, which connected directly with
BRT station USJ 7 and boost up the number of passengers up to nearly 20% (Lim, 2016).
The number of male passengers is only slightly higher compared to female, showing that
female passengers are comfortable with the services. Morton et al. (2016) reported that
female passengers tend to hold more negative attitudes concerning the quality of bus
transit cabin environment. Previous studies have reported that safety and comfort play
an important role in people’s decision to ride public transport (Jain et al., 2014;
Susilawati & Nilakusmwati, 2017). Delbosc and Currie (2012) found that gender has
indirect effects on the feelings of safety on public transport. Another interesting finding
was that the male-female ratio of respondents (1.06) is approximately close to male-
female ratio of Malaysia population (1.07) between 2016 to 2017 (DOSM, 2017). A
possible explanation for this might be that the observation-only conducted during
daytime.
The majority of the passengers are within 15 to 64 years old. This result may be explained
by the fact that the majority of the riders are travelling with the purpose of work,
education and leisure. Out of 2279 passengers, 0.2% of individual disabled person users
ride the system. The boarding patterns for Sunway BRT passengers on working days
show a high number of passengers during the afternoon, followed by evening peak
hours. This may be due to the lunch break that allows users to utilize BRT to find places
to eat. The analysis shows that traditional morning and evening peak hours are not
necessarily the most congested periods. Thursday listed as the day with the greatest
number of passengers recorded. In contrast, Friday has the highest passengers recorded
per hour during peak and non-peak period.
62
Through an examination of passengers ascended and descended counts, we found that

USJ7 station is the most popular station for both activities. The nearby area consists of
residential suburbs, shopping centres, college, hotel and direct transfer to LRT USJ7.
Sunmed has the lowest people ascended and Mentari has the lowest people descended
from. While there is a direct ticket integration between BRT USJ7 with USJ7 LRT line, the
case is not the same with KTM Setia Jaya and BRT Setia Jaya. Passengers need to buy
different ticket if they want to transfer by KTM, which in results adding travel time.
In term of weather, the highest ridership was observed during overcast, whereas the
rain has the lowest ridership. These results of the current study are consistent with those
of Arana et al. (2014), who stated that wind and rain could result in decrease trips. A
high number of ridership during overcast may be due to reduced temperature compare
to sunny day for walking activity. Since Malaysia is a tropical country, it was exposed to
uniform temperature, high humidity and copious rainfall. The relative humidity in
Subang range between 75.0 to 90.0% (MET, 2017). Adverse weather conditions may
cause people to shift transportation modes or avoid travelling at all (Kamga & Yazici,
2014). The reasons are because rain may decrease bus operating speed and delay the
travel time and as transit is associated with walking behaviour, it hinders the potential
user to arrive at the station without getting wet.
During the observations, several aspects can be highlighted for continuous

improvements on the system. First is the acceptance of public in the system. The number
of passengers has been dramatically dropped after the fare was introduced. This
highlighted lower willingness of the passengers to pay more for bus services. Bian and
Ding (2012) discussed that the low price of tickets resulted in a serious operating loss
but expensive tickets will hinder people to ride. Wright and Hook (2007) discuss that the
most common errors in BRT planning include designing system around technology
instead of customer. It is important to note that the BRT services should be targeted
lower and medium households because they are the main user of public services. With
huge investments, the authorities and operators need to introduce new strategies in
order to attract new users and retain existing customers.
63
Continuous promotional campaign on BRT is essential in order to promote the services

to the public. Wright and Hook (2007) discuss the importance of creating public
awareness about the new BRT system and its purposes through information campaigns
to gain public buy-in of the project. In the case of TransJakarta, since BRT is a new
concept, the local television station was not interested to promote the systems.
However, the government at that time employed the service of non-profit organisations
that specialize in corporate communications and this has given positive publicity of BRT
to the public (Kumar et al., 2011). Redman et al. (2013) discuss that the improvement of
public transport is usually measured through the increase of public transport ridership
or the shift of private motor vehicles users to public transport.
Secondly, the features of BRT Sunway include closed system and elevated guideway.
Hook (2005) discussed that a closed busway is unsuitable if the busway constitutes only
a small part of most of the bus routes in the corridor, as it will impose transfer costs on
the majority of the users while offering limited benefit. Wang et al.n(2013) discussed
that traveller’s attraction to BRT increasing when the distance increase. This is because,
with the distance less than 5 km, normal bus service and non-motorized travel via
walking modes may still work well. Hence, by taking advantage of flexibility in BRT, the
corridor should be expanding for other destinations. Further study needs to be done for
future expansion in order to align the BRT routes with the travel demands of low and
medium households. The gap between observed travel and desired travel is important
in order to ensure the utilization of transit services (Combs, 2017). Aragao et al. (2016)
suggested that a participative network reconstruction procedure, beginning with the
reform of the main trunk lines and then extending to the other mains and secondary
lines should be preferred.
Another important note to be highlighted is, BRT implementation successfulness varied

within city and region. In a study done by Rizvi and Sclar (2014), the author between the
implementation of BRT in Delhi and Ahmedabad. Where there were some difficulties on
Delhi implementation, Ahmedabad is successful due to key strategies of outreach,
knowledge sharing, technology showcasing and branding. Hence, the current
government cannot place BRT Sunway performance as a benchmark to stop further
expansion of BRT in Malaysia. Future planning on the implementation of BRT in Malaysia
64
should involve extensive research from all of the agencies involved, in order to ensure
the successfulness of the system.
In another study, Bian and Ding (2012) discussed some limitation on the practicality of
elevated BRT, such as with only one carriage two (2) lane, any emergency occurred on
the lane will delay the operating hours. In addition, only one door is available for people
to ascend and descend from the bus. This results in a delay of dwell time in popular bus
stop like USJ7 since people can only access to bus from one point. However, the
maximum terminal to terminal trip time can be reduced since a few stops are less
popular for people to ascended and/or descended from.
Public transport should be utilized through the optimization of routes, meeting demand
with fewer units and reducing travel time. The fare should be affordable since the major
users of public transport are the urban poor, students and vulnerable groups such as
elderlies and children. People are encouraged to use public transport through elements
such as frequency, door to door speed of journey, security and reliability (Hensher,
Mulley & Yahaya, 2009). The media is a great medium to pass on the central messages
relating to BRT to the general public, especially regarding its benefits.
65
6. Conclusions
This study set out to determine the potential of BRT implementation in Malaysia. The
investigation on the safety performance of public transport shows that it involved in a
smaller number of accidents compare to private vehicles. Taxi has the highest
involvement involving fatalities and injuries, followed by express buses and stage buses.
The introduction of BRT as an improvement on current bus services is aimed to promote
modal shift from private vehicle to the public, and concurrently reducing the number of
accidents involving existence stage bus. The observation on BRT Sunway users shows
that 51.21% of the users are male, 90% of the users are between 15 to 64 years old, the
highest ridership was observed during lunch peak period and Thursday has the highest
number of users. However, it should be noted that travel behaviours may vary especially
during different calendar events such as school holidays and public holidays.
It is important to note that the deployment of BRT affected by local and regional factors.
Identifying and working out the issues would contribute to overall success of the
implementing systematic operation of BRT. Estimating BRT ridership is an important
task. One of the direct benefits on the implementation of Sunway BRT is it can provide
wider coverage of routes compare to before, to enhance options for finding jobs, and
give priorities to people with disabilities, older age and children. However, the
implementation of BRT in Malaysia seems to give full attention to the segregated BRT
transit ways, complex ITS applications and sophisticated station. It is important to note
that the market and the services are the most critical parts in planning and designing the
criteria, in order to achieve successful implementation. Looking back to the purpose of
investment in BRT, it is an attempt to provide efficient and effective public transport
services. However, the objective is not fully achieved if the people did not use the
services.
The main attraction of BRT is on the lower investment costs. If the investment cost is too
much and needs to be absorbed by the riders, then the aim to produce low investment
66
public transport is not achieved. It is the intention of this study to make use of the
extensive knowledge in order to illustrate, through a comparison with leading BRT cases
in the world. The common things that can learn from the successful BRT systems are
those countries have large users of public transport. Since Malaysia has small %age of
public transport users, it is important to tackle the issue of shifting private vehicle user
towards public transport and at the same time, maintain the previous users of public
transport. In order to correct the low perception of people on bus service, BRT needs to
provide an equivalent experience to the light rail system and private vehicle. The shift
to public transit modes will require strong support from local policies and incentives.
A major concern to the private vehicles owners of automobiles and motorcycles is the
loss of road space leading to even more intolerable congestion. Their ideas and opinions
are important as they are the biggest user of Malaysians road. More importantly, private
vehicle users are a target group of commuters who need to be appealed to shift their
current mode of travelling into BRT. Factors such as safety, flexibility and reduction of
travel time need to be highlighted to attract public interest. To put it another way, the
public should know how to differentiate the quality of BRT with conventional buses. As
people do not understand how the system works, they may not utilize new public
transport. It is essential to convey the facts and concern of the majority through
communication and reflecting in planning and design.
It is a great concern to notify that most of the successful BRT systems have a high %age
of public transport user before the implementation. Hence, it will be a great challenge
for Malaysia, with a low number of public transport users to enhance the existing system
and promoting it. MIROS fully supports any initiatives of the government to improve the
public transport system and simultaneously, minimize the number of road accidents in
Malaysia. No single mode must be adequate to meet with the mobility needs in cities.
BRT has a good perspective in reducing the risk of accidents worldwide especially when
BRT is implemented on exclusive lane.
67
References
https:// www.myrapid.com.my/ corporate-information/ media/ media-releases/
prasarana-sets-rm17-billion-in-economic-returns-for-2017-target. Retrieved in June
2017.
http://www.nyc.gov/html/brt/html/routes/pelham.shtml. Retrieved in February 2017
http://brtdata.org/. Retrieved in January 2017.
AMC. (2007). Detailed project report: Ahmedabad bus rapid transit system. Submitted
to the Ministry of Urban Development (MoUD), India for sanction under JNNURM.
Ahmedabad: Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (AMC) Ahmedabad Urban
Development Authority (AUDA) CEPT University.
Allen, H. (2011). Africa’s first full rapid bus system: The Rea Vaya bus system in
Johannesburg, Republic of South Africa. In case study prepared for the Global Report
on Human Settlements 2013. Retrieved from http://www.unhabitat.org/grhs/2013
Alpkokin, P., & Ergun, M. (2012). Istanbul Metrobus: first intercontinental bus rapid
transit. Journal of Transport Geography, 24, pp. 58 – 66.
Aragao, J. J. G., Yamashita, Y., & Filho, R. D. O. (2016). BRT in Brazil: Designing services
in function of given infrastructure projects or designing infrastructure in function of
established service quality patterns? Research in Transportation Economics, 59, pp.
304 – 312.
Arana, P., Cabezudo, S., & Penalba, M. (2014). Influence of weather conditions on transit
ridership: A statistical study using data from Smartcards. Transportation Research
Part A: Policy and Practise, 59, 1 – 12.
68
Azizan, M. A., Ibrahim, F. A., Ismail, R., Ishak, N., Abdul Khadir, M. S. Mansor, A. F. Sk.
Abd Razak, Sk. M., Abd Rahim, M. M., Shaari, M. S., & Azmi, S. (2016).
Implementation of systematic public transportation in Malaysia: Development of
Bus Rapid Transit.
Babulal, V. (2015). Rapid Bus (BRT-Sunway Line) to start impose fare beginning August 1
(2015, July 31). Retrieved from www.nst.com.my on January 2017.
Bassett, T. E., & Marpillero-Colomina, A. (2012). Sustaining Mobility. Bus Rapid Transit
and the role of local politics in Bogota. Latin American Perspectives, 189, pp. 135 –
145.
Bel, G., & Holst, M. (2015). Evaluation of the impact of bus rapid transit on air pollution
(Working Paper 2015/19). Research Institute of Applied Economics. Universitat de
Barcelona. Barcelona.
Bian, J. W., & Ding, M. (2012). The effectiveness of the construction of the Bus Rapid
Transit in Xiamen City. Sustainable Transport for Chinese Cities, pp. 255 – 275.
Bocarejo, J. P., Velasquez, J. M., Diaz, C. A., & Tafur, L. E. (2012). Impact of Bus Rapid
Transit Systems on road safety. Lessons from Bogota, Colombia. Journal of the
Transportation Research Board, 2317, pp. 1 – 7.
Bocarejo, J. P. S., & Oviedo, D. R. H. (2012). Transport accessibility and social inequities:
A tool for identification of mobility needs and evaluation of transport investments.
Journal of Transport Geography, article in Press, corrected proof.
Borhan, M. N., Abdullah O. K. Rahmat, R. A., Ismail, A., & Ismail, R. (2011). Prediction of
traveling behaviour in Putrajaya, Malaysia. Research Journal of Applied Sciences,
Engineering and Technology 3, pp. 434 – 439.
Calvo, J. A. P. (2017). The effects of the bus rapid transit infrastructure on the property
values in Colombia. Travel Behaviour and Society, pp. 90 – 99.
69
Carrigan, A., King, R., Velasquez, J. M., Raifman, M., & Duduta, N. (2013). Social,
environmental and economic impacts of BRT systems. Bus Rapid Transit case studies
from around the world. Embarq report. www.embarq.org.
Carrigan, A., King, R., Velasquez, J., Raifman, M., & Duduta, N. (2013). Social,
environmental and economic impacts of BRT systems. Bus Rapid Transit case studies
from around the world. EMBARQ.
Cervero, R. (2013). Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). An efficient and competitive mode of public
transport. 20th ACEA Scientific Advisory Group Report. University of California,
Berkeley, USA.
Chakrabarti, S. (2016). How can public transit get people out of their cars? An analysis
of transit mode choice for commute trips in Los Angeles. Transport Policy.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2016.11.005
Charez-Baeza, C., & Sheinbaum-Pardo, C. (2014). Sustainable passenger road transport

scenarios to reduce fuel consumption, air pollutant and GHG (greenhouse gas)
emissions in the Mexico City Metropolitan Area. Energy 66, 624 – 634.
Chen, X, Yu, L., Song, G., & Xian, C. (2012). Comparative study of emissions from Bus
Rapid Transit and conventional bus systems. Transportation Research Record, 2277,
pp. 11 – 20.
Cheng, A. S. K., Liu, K. P. Y., & Tulliani, N. (2015). Relationship between driving-violation
behaviours and risk perception in motorcycle accidents. Hong Kong Journal of
Occupational Therapy, vol 25, pp. 32 – 38.
Combs, T. S. (2017). Examining changes in travel patterns among lower wealth

households after BRT investment in Bogota, Colombia. Journal of Transport
Geography, pp. 11 – 20.
Currie, G., & Delbosc, A. (2011). Understanding bus rapid transit route ridership drivers:
An empirical study of Australian BRT systems. Transport Policy, 755 – 764.
70
Dahalan, D., D’Silva, J. L., Abdullah, H, Ismail, I. A., & Ahmad, N. (2015). Youth confidence
in the quality of public transport services: The case of greater KL, Malaysia.
Malaysian Journal of Society and Space, 9, 12 – 22.
Delbosc, A., & Currie, G. (2012). Modelling the causes and impacts of personal safety
perceptions on public transport ridership. Transport Policy, 24, 302 – 309.
Deng, N., Ma, M., & Nelson, J. D. (2015). Measuring the impacts of Bus Rapid Transit on
residential property values: The Beijing case. Research in Transportation Economics,
pp. 1 – 8.
Deng, T., & Nelson, J. (2013). Bus Rapid Transit implementation in Beijing. An evaluation
of performance and impacts. Research in Transportation Economics, 39, 108 – 113.
Deng, N., & Nelson, J. D. (2012). The perception of Bus Rapid Transit: A passenger survey
from Beijing Southern Axis BRT Line 1. Transportation Planning and Technology, 352,
pp. 201 – 219.
Department of Statistics Malaysia. https://www.dosm.gov.my/v1/index.php?r
Duduta, N., Adriazola, C., Hidalgo, D., Lindau, L. A., & Dos Santos, P. M. (2013). The
relationship between safety, capacity, and operating speed on bus rapid transit Case
Study: Transoeste Brt, Rio De Janeiro. Proceedings of 13th World Conference on
Transport Research, 1 – 21.
Duduta, N., Adriazola, C., Hidalgo, D., Lindau, L. A., & Jaffe, R. (2012). Understanding
road safety impact of high-performance Bus Rapid Transit and busway design
features. Transportation Research Record, 2317, pp. 8 – 14.
Fernandez, R. (2011). Experimental study of bus boarding and alighting times. In

European Transport Conference in Glasgow, Scotland, UK.
Feye, G. L., Evia, P., & Benefoh, D. T. (2014). Comparative assessment of success and
failure factors for implementation of bus rapid transit system in Accra and Bogota.
University of Bonn.
71
Construction almost halfway complete (2014, June 28). The Star. Retrieved from
http://www.thestar.com.my on January 2017(1)
García, G. (2011). Untitled presentation on Metrobus to the Clean Air Institute.

Metrobus, México. Available at: www.cleanairinstitute.org/download/rosario/
gp3_4_03_gonzalo_garcia.pdf.
Gilbert, A. (2008). Bus Rapid Transit: Is Transmilenio a miracle cure? Trans. Reviews, 288.
Goh, K., Currie, G, Sarvi, M., & Logan, D. (2014). Bus accident analysis of routes with/
without bus priority. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 65, pp. 18 – 27.
Goh, K., Currie, G., Sarvi, M., & Lofan, D. (2013). Road safety benefits from bus priority?
An empirical study. Transportation Research Record. Journal Transportation
Research Board.
Gopalakrishnan, S. (2012). A public health perspective of road traffic accidents. Journal

of Family Medicine and Primary Care, pp. 144 – 150.
Hensher, D. A., Mulley, C., & Yahya, N. (2009). Passenger experience with quality-
enhanced bus service: The tyne and wear “superoute” services. Transportation, 37,
239 – 256.
Hess, D. B., Taylor, B. D., & Yoh, A. C. (2005). Light rail lite or cost-effective improvements
to bus service? Evaluating Costs of Implementing Bus Rapid Transit, 22 – 30.
Hidalgo, D., & Carrigan, A. (2010). Modernizing public transportation. Research Report,
EMBARQ, World Resources Institute’s Center for Sustainable Transport. Available at
http://pdf.wri.org/modernizing_public_transportation.pdf
Hidalgo, D., & Diaz, R. (2014). Advancing urban mobility with national programs: A
review of Colombia’s National Urban Transport Policy. Transportation Research
Board 93nd Annual Meeting. Washington DC, USA.
72
Hidalgo, D., & Graftieaux, P. (2008). Bus rapid transit systems in Latin America and Asia:
Results and difficulties in 11 cities. Transportation Research Record, 2072, pp. 77 –
88.
Hidalgo & Gutierrez. (2013). BRT and BHLS around the world: Explosive growth, large
positive impacts and many issues outstanding. Research in Transportation
Economics, 39, pp. 8 – 13.
Hidalgo, D., Pereira, L., Estupinan, N., & Jimenez, P. L. (2013). TransMilenio BRT system
in Bogota, high performance and positive impact – Main results of an ex-post
evaluation. Research in Transportation Economics, 39, pp. 133 – 138.
Hidalgo, D., & King, R. (2014). Public transport integration in Bogota and Cali, Colombia-
Facing transition from semi-deregulated services to full regulation citywide.
Research in Transportation Economics, pp. 1 – 10.
Huang, H. F., Stewart, J. R., & Zegeer, V. C. (2002). Evaluation of lane reduction “road
diet” measures on crashes and injuries. Transportation Research Record, 02 – 2955.
Huo, Y., Zhao, J., Li, W., & Hu, X. (2014). Measuring bus service reliability: An example of
bus rapid transit in Changzhou. Journal of Public Transportation, 17(2), 113 – 133.
Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP) Mexico. Perspectivas de

crecimiento de la Red Metrobús y transporte integrado del Distrito Federal a 2018.
Mexico: ITDP; 2012.
Ismail, A., & Hashim, H. F. (2015). Modelling of transportation policies to encourage

shifting from private car to the public transport usage in Putrajaya. Jurnal
Kejuruteraan, 27, 15 – 21.
Jain, S., Aggarwal, P., Kumar, P., Singhal, S., & Sharma, P. (2014). Identifying public
preferences using multi-criteria decision making for assessing the shift of urban
commuters from private to public transport: A case study of Delhi. Transportation
Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, pp. 60 – 70.
73
Jaiswal, A., Sharma, A., & Krishnan, Y. (2012). Potential of Bus Rapid Transit System for
million plus Indian cities: A case study of Janmarg BRTS, Ahmadabad, India.
International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Studies, pp. 235 – 241.
Jenks, M., & Jones, C. (2010). Dimensions of the sustainable city. Springer Science+
Business Media. Springer Netherland, pp. 6 – 10.
Joewono, T. B., & Santoso, D. J. (2012). The causal relationship of the service quality of
the TransJakarta busway. Public Transp., 4, 77 – 100.
Jun, M. J. (2012). Redistributive effects of bus rapid transit (BRT) on development

patterns and property values in Seoul, Korea. Transport Policy, pp. 85 – 92.
Kamga, C., & Yazici, M. A. (2014). Temporal and weather related variation patterns of
urban travel time: Consideration and caveats for value of travel time, value of
variability and mode choice studies. Transportation Research Part C.
Kang, C. D. (2010). The impact of bus rapid transit on location choice of creative
industries and employment density in Seoul, Korea. International Journal of Urban
Sciences, 123 – 151.
Kathuria, A., Parida, M., Sekhar, Ch. R., & Sharma, A. (2016). A review of bus rapid transit
implementation in India. Cogent Engineering 3.
Kogdenko, N. (2011). Successfulness of Bus Rapid Transit systems in Asia. X-post

evaluation. Groningen: University of Groningen. Retrieved from
http://www.ecn.nl/docs/library/report/2011/o11013.pdf
Kolawole, G. (2010). An evaluation of the impact of bus rapid transit in urban intra-city
passenger movement in Lagos state. Presented at WCTR 2010, Lisbon.
Kumar, A., Zimmerman, S., & Agarwal, O. P. (2011). International experience in Bus Rapid
Transit (BRT) implementation synthesis of lessons learned from Lagos,
Johannesburg, Jakarta, Delhi and Ahmedabad. Report no 69308. Washington DC:
World Bank.
74
Laporan Statistik Kemalangan Jalan Raya. (2015). Royal Malay Police Department.
Levinson, H., Zimmerman, S., Clinger, J. Rutherford, S., Smith, R., Cracknell, J., &
Soberman, R. (2003). Bus rapid transit, volume 1: Case studies in bus rapid transit,
TCRP Report 90. Washington US TCRP.
Li, Y., Qiu, J., Liu, G-d, Zhou, L., Wang, Z-g, Zhao, X., & Jiang, Z. (2008). Motorcycle
accidents in China. Chinese Journal of Traumatology, 114, 243 – 246.
Lim, J. A. (2016). Letters – LRT fares relatively low. (2016, August 28). Retrieved from
www.thesundaily.my on February 2017
Lin, B., & Omoju, O. E. (2017). Does private investment in the transport sector mitigate
the environmental impact of urbanization? Evidence from Asia. Journal of Cleaner
Production, pp. 1 – 11.
Lindau, L., Hildalgo, D., & Facchin, D. (2010). Bus Rapid Transit in Curitiba, Brazil: A look
at the outcome after 35 years of bus-oriented development. Transportation
Research Record, Vol. 2193, pp. 17 – 27.
Litman, T., & Fitzroy, S. (2017). Safe travels. Evaluating mobility management traffic
safety impacts. Victoria Transport Policy Institute. www.vtpi.org
Malaysian Meteorological Department. http://www.met.gov.my/ retrieved on Jan 2017.
Mallqui, Y. Y. C., & Pojani, D. (2017). Barriers to successful bus rapid transit expansion:
Developed cities versus developing megacities. In Case Studies on Transport Policy.
http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1016/j.cstp.2017.01.004
Mohd Shariff, N. (2012). Private vehicle ownership and transportation planning in

Malaysia. International Conference on Traffic and Transportation Engineering (ICTTE
2012). IACSIT Press, Singapore.
75
More BRT could be built at various locations, says Prasarana (2015, March 17), Astro
Awani. Retrieved from http://english.astroawani.com on January 2017(2).
Morton, C., Caulfield, B., & Anable, J. (2016). Customer perceptions of quality of service
in public transport: Evidence for bus transit in Scotland. Case Studies on Transport
Policy, vol 4, pp. 199 – 207.
Munoz, J. C., Batarce, M., & Hidalgo, D. (2014). Transantiago, five years after its launch.
Research in Transportation Economics, 48, pp. 184 – 193.
Munoz, J. C., & Ortuzar, J. D. (2009). Transantiago: The fall and rise of a radical public
transport intervention. In Saaleh, W., and Sammer, G. (eds). Success and failure of
travel demand management: Is road user pricing the most feasible option? Ashgate,
Aldershot.
Munoz, J. C., & Paget-Seekins, L. (2016). Restructuring public transport through bus rapid
transit: An international and interdisciplinary perspective. Policy Press. Great
Britain.
Nelson, A. C., Appleyard, B., Kannan, S., Ewing, R., Miller, M., & Eskic, D. (2013). Bus rapid
transit and economic development: Case study of the Eugene-Springfield BRT
system. Journal of Public Transportation, 16(3), 41 – 57.
Nikitas, A., & Karlsson. (2015). A worldwide state-of-the-art analysis for bus rapid transit:
Looking for the success formula. Journal of Public Transportation, pp. 1 – 33.
Noel, A. (2016). Learn from costly mistakes of Sunway BRT, says Penang Institute. (2016,
February 28). Retrieved from www.themalaysianoutsider.com on February 2017.
Ong, K. M., & Fong, J. (2016). The Sunway Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Line: Lessons for the
future. Written for Penang Institute.
Onn, C. C., Karim, M. R., & Yusoff, S. (2014). Mode choice between private and public
transport in Klang Valley, Malaysia. The Scientific World Journal, vol. 2014, Article ID
394587, 14 pages.
76
Paget-Seekins, L. (2015). Bus rapid transit as a neoliberal contradiction. Journal of

Transport Geography, 48, 115 – 120.
Pai, M., & Hidalgo, D. (2009). Indian Bus Rapid Transit systems funded by the Jawaharlal
Nehru National Urban Renewal mission. Journal of the Transportation Research
Board, pp. 10 – 18.
Pathak, M., & Shukla, P. R. (2015). Co-benefits of low carbon passenger transport actions
in Indian cities: Case study of Ahmedabad. Transportation Research Part D.
Paul, H., Potter, S., Warren, J., & Gillingwater, D. (2013). Can bus really be the new tram?
Research in Transportation Economics, 158 – 166.
Perk, V., Bovino, S., Catala, M., Reader, S., & Ulloa, S. (2013). Silver line Bus Rapid Transit
in Boston, Massachusetts. Journal of the Transportation Research Boards, 2350, 72
– 79.
Peak, M., Henke, C., & Wnuk, L. (2005). Bus rapid transit ridership analysis.
Peltier-Thiberge, N. (2015). Lagos Bus Rapid Transit System: Decongesting and

depolluting mega cities. World Bank Transport for Development Blog.
http://blogs.worldbank.org/transport/lagos-bus-rapid-transit-system-
decongesting-and-depolluting-mega-cities-0
Pojani, D., & Stead, D. (2015). Sustainable urban transport in the developing world:
beyond megacities. Sustainability, 7, 7784 – 7805.
Ponnaluri, R. V. (2011). Sustainable Bus Rapid Transit initiatives in India: The role of
decisive leadership and strong institutions. Transport Policy, 18, 269 – 275.
Ponrahono, Z., Bachok, S., Ibrahim, M., & Osman, M. M. (2016). Assessing passengers’
satisfaction level on bus services in selected urban and rural centres of peninsular
Malaysia. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 222, 837 – 844.
77
Redman, L., Friman, M., Garling, T., & Hartig, T. (2013). Quality attributes of public
transport that attract car users: A research revire. Transport Policy, 25, 119 – 127.
Rizvi, A., & Sclar, E. (2014). Implementing bus rapid transit: A tale of two Indian cities.
Research in Transportation Economics, 48, 194 – 204.
RM15 mln investment on BRT-Sunway line electric buses-Prasarana. (2016, Oct 13).
Astro Awani. Retrieved from http://english.astroawani.com on January 2017.
Rodriguez, D. A., Vergel-Tovar, E., & Camrago, W. F. (2015). Land development impacts
of BRT in a sample of stops in Quito and Bogota. Transport Policy.
Rogat, J., Dhar, S., Joshi, R., Mahadevia, D., & Mendoza, J. C. (2015). Sustainable
Transport: BRT experiences from Mexico and India. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews:
Energy and Environment, 4(6), 564 – 574.
Rogat, J., Hinostroza, M., & Ernest K. (2009). Sustainable transport practices in Latin
America through mass transit technologies. In: École Nationale Polytechnique,
editor. Actes. Colloque International Environnement et Transports dans des
Contextes Différents. Ghardaia: École Nationale Polytechnique; 2009, 83 – 92.
Rosli, L. (2015). Subang Jaya takes green city lead (2015, Nov 7). New Straits Times.
https://www.nst.com.my/news/2015/11/subang-jaya-takes-green-city-lead
Ram, S. (2015). http://says.com/my/news/all-you-should-know-about-the-brt-sunway-

line
Sandoval, E. E., & Hidalgo, D. (2002). TransMilenio: A high capacity-low cost bus rapid
transit system developed for Bogota, Colombia. Urban Public Transport
Transportation Systems.
Selva, M. T. (2016). Steep fares keep passengers away (2016, April 29). The Star.
Retrieved from http://www.thestar.com.my on January 2017
78
Susilawati, M., & Nilakusmawati, D. P. E. (2017). Study on the factors affecting the quality
of public bus transportation service in Bali province using factor analysis. Journal of
Physics. Conference Series, 855.
Sze, G. (2015). New BRT fares shocking, likely to discourage users. (2015, August 7).
Retrieved from paultan.org on February 2017.
Thole, C., & Samus, J. (2009). Bus rapid transit and development: Policies and practices
that affect development around transit. Federal Transit Administration.
Tiwari, G., & Jain, D. (2012). Accessibility and safety indicators for all road users: Case
study Delhi BRT. Journal of Transport Geography 22, 87 – 95.
Turner, M., Kooshian, C., & Winkelman, S. (2012). Case study: Colombia’s Bus Rapid
Transit (BRT) Development and Expansion. An analysis of barriers and critical
enablers of Colombia’s BRT systems. Center for Clean Air Policy.
Urban Transport and Poverty: Mobility and accessibility effects of IDB-supported BRT
systems in Cali and Lima. Inter-American Development Bank. June 2016. New York,
Washington D. C.
Useche, S., Cendalers, B., Alonso, F., & Serge, A. (2017). Comparing job stress, burnout,
health and traffic crashes of urban bus and BRT drivers. American Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol 5, 25 – 32.
Vasconcellos, E. A. (2017). Urban transport policies in Brazil: The creation of a

discriminatory mobility system. Journal of Transport Geography.
Vaz, E., & Venter, C. (2012). The effectiveness of Bus Rapid Transit as part of a poverty-
reduction strategy: Some early impacts in Johannesburg. 31st Southern African
Transport Conference, South Africa.
Venter, C., Hidalgo, D., & Pineda, A. F. V. (2013). Assessing the equity impacts of bus
rapid transit: Emerging frameworks and evidence. 13th WCTR, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
79
Wåhlberg, A. E. (2004a). Characteristics of low speed accidents with buses in public

transport: Part II. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 36(1), 6371.
Wan, D., Kamga, C., Liu, J., Sugiura, A., & Beaton, E. B. (2016). Rider perception of a
“light” bus rapid transit system – The New York city select bus service. Transport
Policy, 49, 41 – 55.
Wright, L., & Hook, W. (2007). Bus rapid transit planning guide. Institute for
Transportation & Development Policy. New York, USA.
Wu, I., & Pojani, D. (2016). Obstacles to the creation of successful bus rapid transit
systems: The case of Bangkok. Research in Transportation Economics, 1 – 10.
Yazici, M., Levinson, H., Ilicali, M., Camkesen, N., & Kamga, C. (2013). A bus rapid transit
line case study: Istanbul’s Metrobus system. Journal of Public Transportation, Vol.
16, No. 1, 153 – 177.
Zhang, X., Liu, Z., & Wang, H. (2004). Lessons of bus rapid transit from nine cities in China.
http://doi.org/10.3141/2394-06
Zhang, X., Liu, Z., & Wang, H. (2013). Lessons of bus rapid transit from nine cities in China.
Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Trans. Research Board, 2394, 45 –
54.
Zimmerman, S., & H. S. Levinson. (2004). Vehicle selection for BRT: Issues and options.
Journal of Public Transportation, 7(1), 83 – 103.
80
A Review of Recent Developments in Bus Rapid Transit
System
Designed by: MIROS
: :
: - :

MRR No 327 - A Review of Recent Developments in Bus Rapid Transit System - V6 - Upload - Compressed

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

MRR No 327 - A Review of Recent Developments in Bus Rapid Transit System - V6 - Upload - Compressed

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MRR No.

A Review of Recent Developments

Perpustakaan Negara Malaysia Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

List of Tables vii

4.5 BRT Observation 51

Table 1 Motor vehicles involved in road accidents by type of vehicle, 38

Figure 19 Percentage of BRT users ascending and descending by station 58

1.1 Scope and Objectives of the Study

• To evaluate the potential of Bus Rapid Transit implementation

• To analyse the safety performance of public transport, particularly bus.

1.2 Limitation of the Study

1.3 Methodology of the Study

2.1 BRT Features

2.1.1 Dedicated Running Way

2.1.3 Pre Board Fare Collections

2.1.4 The Usage of ITS

2.1.5 Operation Speed

2.1.7 Type of Vehicles

2.2 BRT vs Light Rail

2.3 Successful Implementation of BRT

2.3.2 Transit Ridership

improvements of BRT system should attract more passenger compared to conventional

2.3.3 Travel Time

2.3.7 Environmental Impacts

After the implementation of Transmilenio BRT in Bogota, there is a reduction of sulphur

2.3.8 Land Development and Property Values

2.4 Effects of BRT in Road Safety

By comparing the number of accidents in Transmilenio corridor between 1999 (without

2.5 Challenges in Implementing BRT

2.5.1 Planning Issues before the Implementation of BRT and Poor

2.5.2 Political Interference

In Chile, the resignation of Minister of Public Works, Transport and Telecommunication

2.5.3 Poor Adaptation to Local Context

2.5.4 Lack of Communication

2.5.5 Road Safety Issues

2.5.7 Connection to Low Wealth Households

transportation services in the city of Soacha, a municipality adjacent to Bogota have

2.5.8 System Long Viability

3.1 Sampling Method

4.1 Road Crash Overview in Malaysia

Buses Taxi Passenger car Motor

Crash rate per 100

Crash rate per 100

Crash rate per 100

2011 9,986 14.24 11197 12.39 546,702 5.66 129,017 1.29

Expressway Federal State Municipal Other

Figure 4 Public vehicles fatality by type of roads from 2011 – 2013

4.2 Population in Malaysia

According to the Department of Statistics Malaysia, the number of Malaysians in 2016

persons per square kilometre. In addition, Selangor recorded level of urbanisation of

4.3 Traffic Growth in Malaysia

Number of vehicles has been gradually increasing in Malaysia, especially private

Figure 7 Number of registered vehicles in Malaysia from 2005 to 2015

4.4 BRT Implementation in Malaysia

Figure 10 BRT Sunway route and station (Source: Google Maps)

4.4.1 Application of ITS Technology in the BRT System

4.4.3 Service Frequency

4.4.4 Fare Structure

4.4.5 Operating Speed

4.4.6 Capital Cost

4.4.7 Operating Cost

Table 2 Fare structure for BRT Sunway (Source: NST, 2015)

KM travelled Cost (MYR)