Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Transportation Engineering
Mode of Transport: A Case Study of
Putrajaya, Malaysia
https://doi.org/10.3311/PPtr.9228 Muhamad Nazri Borhan1*, Ahmad Nazrul Hakimi Ibrahim1,
Creative Commons Attribution b Deprizon Syamsunur2, Riza Atiq Rahmat1
Abstract 1 Introduction
This paper investigates the constraints that limit the use of pub- Antrop (2000) defined urbanisation as a complex process
lic bus by people commuting to work in Putrajaya, Malaysia. which transform rural landscapes into urban ones, forming star-
Putrajaya was built to replace the city of Kuala Lumpur as shaped spatial patterns controlled by the area’s physical condi-
the new administrative centre for the government of Malaysia. tions and accessibility by routes of transportation. The level of
This research adopted qualitative methods which involved a urbanisation in the world in the mid-19th century was predicted
total of 29 respondents who use car and/or bus to commute to to range between 4 and 7% compared to the level of urbani-
their workplaces. The findings of this study show that several sation at around A.D. 1600 and the beginning of 19th century
factors, such as reliability, safety, and customer service, play of only 1.6% and 2.2%, respectively. Urbanisation progressed
considerable roles in promoting the use of public transpor- rapidly in the region of Western Europe and North America
tation. The respondents agree that reliability (e.g. frequency, during the early industrialisation era. According to Antrop
punctuality, and transfer) is an important factor in choosing (2004), urbanisation is one of the most important factor in
a particular mode of transport. Safety is one of the major European civilisation. In European countries, the percentage
concern amongst the respondents, which need to be improved of people living in urban area has reached approximately 80%.
along with customer satisfaction of the public bus service. The As with developed countries, developing countries, such
results of this study suggest that a more reliable and accessible as Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia, also experienced urbani-
service is required to promote public bus as an attractive mode sation. However, urbanisation in these areas progressed in a
of transport. different way from that experienced by developed (western)
countries. Murakami et al. (2005) highlighted that Jakarta
Keywords (Indonesia) and Bangkok (Thailand) experienced similar trend
public bus, car use, service quality, qualitative research of decreasing population density in the city centre, while in the
same study found that Manila (Philippines) showed a different
trend. During the growing era of urbanisation, accessibility and
transportation infrastructure become the most important factor
(Lewis and Maund, 1976).
Malaysia too goes through the urbanisation phenomena.
This phenomenon has resulted in increased demand for trans-
portation. The demand for transportation is proportional with
the rapid migration of people from rural to urban areas. Most
urban areas in developing Asian countries such as Malaysia are
densely populated and urban transportation in these areas rely
on land-based transportation such as cars and motorcycles as
well as rail-based transportation, namely commuter trains, light
1
Department of Civil and Structural Engineering,
Faculty of Engineering and Built Environment,
rapid transit (LRT), mass rapid transit (MRT), etc. The expen-
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, diture (e.g. fuel and toll costs) incurred for commuting in urban
43600 Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia areas takes as much as 5 to 15 percent of household income
2
Faculty of Engineering, USCI University, (Tangphaisankun et al., 2010).
56000 Cheras, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Presently, most Malaysians dependent on private cars to com-
*
Corresponding author, e-mail: mnazri_borhan@ukm.edu.my mute from one place to another. This is evident from the fact
Table 1 Age range and mode of transport used by respondents. On the other hand, public transport users are those with
Public transport lower income who often cannot afford to own a car. However,
Age Car user Both
user Total they earnestly hope that bus operators will reduce the travel
group
Male Female Male Female Male Female time of the buses:
20-29 1 6 2 3 1 1 14
30-39 1 3 3 3 1 11 “I have no car. I take the bus every day. I hope the bus oper-
40-49 1 1 2
ators will reduce the bus travel time which takes more than 45
minutes to reach the destination”.
50-59 1 1 2
(Male bus user, 26 years old)
Total 2 9 7 7 1 3 29
“Public transport will be better if the bus frequents every 15 “I agree! Using the bus is cheaper than using the car”.
minutes”. (Male car user, 32 years old)
(Female car user, 29 years old)
However, financially, those who had just begun working
Car users are more concerned with the punctuality of public may not be able to afford owning a car and therefore consider
transport than public transport users. At the time of the study, public transport as an important means of commuting. None of
there were four buses operating in Putrajaya during peak hours the public transport users complain about the cost of their trip.
(morning and evening). Many car users asserted that they did not
take the bus because the service is not available at the time that “As a person who is just starting a career, using the bus to
they needed it and they might be late for work because of this. work certainly saves my budget because I only spend as much
as MYR 5 (USD 1.50) to pay for bus fare every week”.
“With the car, I can go to work without having to walk to the (Female bus user, 21 years old)
bus stop and there is no need to wait for the bus”.
(Male car user, 25 years old) 3.4 Accessibility to Public Transport
The level of accessibility to transport services is a key factor
“I had an intention to travel to work by bus. But when I in planning the facilities for public transport. “Transit accessi-
heard complaints from many of my friends about the bus not bility” refers to users’ ability to access transit facilities such as
being on time and the travel time is also usually quite long, I’m bus stops or train stations. Transit accessibility is influenced by
quite worried to take the bus, it’s better to drive car to work”. factors such as pedestrian path, bicycle lane, bus-stop condi-
(Female car user, 32 years old) tion, and access by people with disability. With regard to acces-
sibility to public transport, bus users show a higher level of
“Public transport must be punctual so a user does not have concern than car users.
to wait too long and they are late to work as a result”.
(Female car user, 23 years old) “Bus stops should be provided at both sides of the road”.
(Female bus user, 24 years old)
Public transport users are also not satisfied with the arrival
time of the buses. “Need to provide more bus stops for the convenience of
users. If there is no bus stop, where do we wait for the bus?”.
“The bus arrival time should be systematic and frequent so (Male bus user, 26 years old)
that passengers never have to wait too long to board a bus”.
(Female bus user, 24 years old) 3.5 Information
The availability of crucial information, such as bus route and
“I hope that the public transport will be more punctual to schedule, is important to attract people to use public transport.
follow the schedule. I had to wait up to an hour for the bus. Several respondents, especially private car users, stressed the
The long wait for the bus will waste my time”. importance of bus route and schedule.
(Female bus user, 28 years old)
“They need to provide bus schedules and routes to facilitate
3.3 Cost users’ reference. I think it is definitely confusing for the first-
The general notion is that public transport service is cheaper time bus user if here is no information available at the bus stop
than owning private cars. All respondents generally agree that or in the bus”.
public transport will reduce their travel cost. This indicates that (Female car user, 24 years old)
although bus travel is economical, it is not significant enough
to encourage private car drivers to switch to public transport. “I’m actually not sure whether the information is provided at
the bus stop or in the bus. But it is important for bus operators
“I know by taking the bus I only need to pay as much as to provide sufficient information”.
MYR 0.50 (USD 0.15) per trip, but I’m more comfortable driv- (Male car user, 41 years old)
ing to work”.
(Female car user, 35 years old)
“Bus information is available. But sometimes bus travelling Most private car users are of the opinion that bus service
en route is not found in the routing schedule. Very confusing”. must be provided until late night to facilitate the commute of
(Male bus user, 26 years old) the public.
3.6 Transfer “Either after office hours or on the weekend, the bus service
As a feeder for the rail service, public bus service plays an should be on schedule”.
important role in ensuring a seamless transfer from one mode (Male car user, 43 years old)
of transport to another, thus ensuring an effective public trans-
port system. Users may stop using public transport if they have One former bus user echoed a similar opinion with public
to wait a long time for the bus-to-train or train-to-bus transfer. transport users in terms of hours of service.
Respondents also complained that, when there are no passengers,
bus drivers would drive pass by an interchange station without “Before using the car, I used the public transport but many
stopping. Public transport users were more concerned than private problems arise whenever I had to do overtime jobs, especially on
car users about the transfer service provided by bus operators. weekends. I wasted my time and energy just to wait for the bus”.
(Female car user, 34 years old)
“Each bus must stop at an interchange station for at least
one minute to wait for passengers and should not pass by when 3.8 Safety and Customer Service
there are no passengers. It is possible that the passenger could Safety is an important factor when choosing a mode of
be walking to the bus stop to get the bus at that time”. transportation. Several respondents, especially female respon-
(Male bus user, 31 years old) dents, are more concerned about their safety when using pub-
lic transport. One woman reported that on one occasion the
“The bus at the interchange station should be departing bus driver violated traffic rules.
after the train arrives. When I arrived at the interchange sta-
tion, the bus just departed. So I have to wait for the next bus. “The bus drivers should be trained well and they should be
This wastes my time”. exposed to the traffic regulations. It is common to see the bus
(Female bus user, 28 years old) drivers driving quite dangerously over the speed limit”.
(Female bus user, 29 years old)
One former bus user switched to using her car because of the
delays she experienced when using public bus. “The bus driver drives very fast without considering the
safety of passengers on board. They also violate traffic signs”.
“Reduce the number of bus exchange to the destination (Female car user and occasional bus user, 34 years old)
because it will waste a lot of time”.
(Female car user, 34 years old) “When I was driving a car to work, a bus had overtaken me.
I think I was driving around 60 to 70km/h at that time. The bus
3.7 Hours of Service was being driven quite fast”.
Hours of service is one of the key factors in promoting pub- (Male car user, 27 years old)
lic transport. Several respondents, specifically those who use
public transport, expressed their dissatisfaction with the hours Negative incidents, such as tardy service, lack of or incor-
of service in the evening and on weekends. The lack of service rect information on bus/train routes and schedule, could mar
during off-peak hours causes inconvenience to those who have the reputation of public transport. Unprofessional employees
to work overtime. could mean poor quality service.