IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jotrge/v100y2022ics0966692322000345.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quantifying the relative importance of rapid transit implementation barriers: Evidence from ecuador

Author

Listed:
  • Arias, Juan F.
  • Bachmann, Chris

Abstract

Nineteen rapid transit projects have been planned in Ecuador, but only nine projects reached implementation. This research evaluates the critical barriers for project implementation along with corresponding mitigation measures. A mixed method, based on an existing theoretical framework and Best-Worst Scaling (BWS), is proposed and applied. The analyses are grounded by in-depth interviews and surveys conducted with the technical teams of the planned projects. Results suggest the top tier of the critical barriers is composed of 1) lack of political leadership, commitment or continuity; 2) underestimation of implementation complexities; 3) political frictions; and 4) rushed planning processes. Seven key mitigation strategies were identified and linked to each barrier: 1) Connect the social, political and technical perspectives; 2) Aim at starting construction before the end of political cycles; 3) Increase the private role in the procurement strategy; 4) Increase community input during planning; 5) Generate public opinion monitoring; 6) Adapt projects features to community input (when applicable); and 7) Focus on the implementation of one trunkline at a time. Moreover, evidence suggests critical barriers are not technology specific, but rather endemic to the planning process and that the projects' critical political dependence promoted planning based on political cycles in detriment of long-term efforts. These findings align with previous results from developing cities, confirming the transferability of results at an aggregate level, but also showed that the barriers and corresponding mitigation measures can be context specific.

Suggested Citation

  • Arias, Juan F. & Bachmann, Chris, 2022. "Quantifying the relative importance of rapid transit implementation barriers: Evidence from ecuador," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jotrge:v:100:y:2022:i:c:s0966692322000345
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2022.103311
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0966692322000345
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2022.103311?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Minh Hieu Nguyen & Thanh Tung Ha & Sy Sua Tu & Thanh Chuong Nguyen, 2019. "Impediments to the bus rapid transit implementation in developing countries – a typical evidence from Hanoi," International Journal of Urban Sciences, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(4), pages 464-483, October.
    2. Chou, Jui-Sheng & Ping Tserng, H. & Lin, Chieh & Yeh, Chun-Pin, 2012. "Critical factors and risk allocation for PPP policy: Comparison between HSR and general infrastructure projects," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 36-48.
    3. Bent Flyvbjerg, 2009. "Survival of the unfittest: why the worst infrastructure gets built--and what we can do about it," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 25(3), pages 344-367, Autumn.
    4. Louviere, Jordan & Lings, Ian & Islam, Towhidul & Gudergan, Siegfried & Flynn, Terry, 2013. "An introduction to the application of (case 1) best–worst scaling in marketing research," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 292-303.
    5. Lindau, Luis Antonio & Hidalgo, Dario & de Almeida Lobo, Adriana, 2014. "Barriers to planning and implementing Bus Rapid Transit systems," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 9-15.
    6. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387.
    7. Bocarejo S., Juan Pablo & Oviedo H., Daniel Ricardo, 2012. "Transport accessibility and social inequities: a tool for identification of mobility needs and evaluation of transport investments," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 142-154.
    8. Marsden, Greg & Reardon, Louise, 2017. "Questions of governance: Rethinking the study of transportation policy," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 238-251.
    9. Garsous, Grégoire & Suárez-Alemán, Ancor & Serebrisky, Tomás, 2019. "Cable cars in urban transport: Travel time savings from La Paz-El Alto (Bolivia)," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 171-182.
    10. Rizvi, Andrea & Sclar, Elliott, 2014. "Implementing bus rapid transit: A tale of two Indian cities," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 194-204.
    11. Muñoz, Juan Carlos & Hidalgo, Darío, 2013. "Workshop 2: Bus rapid transit as part of enhanced service provision," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 104-107.
    12. Wu, Irene & Pojani, Dorina, 2016. "Obstacles to the creation of successful bus rapid transit systems: The case of Bangkok," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 44-53.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Abdi, Mohammad Hamed, 2021. "What the newcomers to transit-oriented development are confronted with? Evidence from Iranian policy and planning," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    2. Malik, Bilal Zia & Rehman, Zia ur & Khan, Ammad Hassan & Akram, Waseem, 2021. "Investigating users' travel behaviours and perceptions of single-corridor BRT: Lessons from Lahore," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    3. Valerio de Martinis & Francesca Pagliara & Alan Wilson, 2014. "The Evolution and Planning of Hierarchical Transport Networks," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 41(2), pages 192-210, April.
    4. Pettersson, Fredrik & Sørensen, Claus Hedegaard, 2020. "Why do cities invest in bus priority measures? Policy, polity, and politics in Stockholm and Copenhagen," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 178-185.
    5. Andani, I Gusti Ayu & La Paix Puello, Lissy & Geurs, Karst, 2021. "Modelling effects of changes in travel time and costs of toll road usage on choices for residential location, route and travel mode across population segments in the Jakarta-Bandung region, Indonesia," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 81-102.
    6. Luis A. Guzman & Victor A. Cantillo-Garcia & Julian Arellana & Olga L. Sarmiento, 2023. "User expectations and perceptions towards new public transport infrastructure: evaluating a cable car in Bogotá," Transportation, Springer, vol. 50(3), pages 751-771, June.
    7. Wu, Irene & Pojani, Dorina, 2016. "Obstacles to the creation of successful bus rapid transit systems: The case of Bangkok," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 44-53.
    8. Davis, Katrina J & Burton, Michael & Kragt, Marit E, 2016. "Discrete choice models: scale heterogeneity and why it matters," Working Papers 235373, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    9. Hrelja, Robert & Khan, Jamil & Pettersson, Fredrik, 2020. "How to create efficient public transport systems? A systematic review of critical problems and approaches for addressing the problems," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 186-196.
    10. Posada, Héctor M. & García-Suaza, Andres, 2022. "Transit infrastructure and informal housing: Assessing an expansion of Medellín's Metrocable system," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 209-228.
    11. Chinnawat Hoonsiri & Siriluk Chiarakorn & Vasin Kiattikomol, 2021. "Using Combined Bus Rapid Transit and Buses in a Dedicated Bus Lane to Enhance Urban Transportation Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-18, March.
    12. Glenk, Klaus & Eory, Vera & Colombo, Sergio & Barnes, Andrew, 2014. "Adoption of greenhouse gas mitigation in agriculture: An analysis of dairy farmers' perceptions and adoption behaviour," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 49-58.
    13. Dominik Ziemke & Johan W. Joubert & Kai Nagel, 2018. "Accessibility in a Post-Apartheid City: Comparison of Two Approaches for Accessibility Computations," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 241-271, June.
    14. Joseph F. Hair & Christian M. Ringle & Siegfried P. Gudergan & Andreas Fischer & Christian Nitzl & Con Menictas, 2019. "Partial least squares structural equation modeling-based discrete choice modeling: an illustration in modeling retailer choice," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 12(1), pages 115-142, April.
    15. Aizaki, Hideo & Fogarty, James, 2023. "R packages and tutorial for case 1 best–worst scaling," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    16. Poku-Boansi, Michael & Marsden, Greg, 2018. "Bus rapid transit systems as a governance reform project," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 193-202.
    17. Rottemberg, Julieta & Ghasri, Milad & Grzybowska, Hanna & Dockery, Alfred M. & Waller, S. Travis, 2022. "Inequality and access to services for remote populations: An Australian case study," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    18. Jose Alberto Lara-Pulido & Adan L. Martinez-Cruz, 2023. "Stated benefits of teleworking in Mexico City: a discrete choice experiment on office workers," Transportation, Springer, vol. 50(5), pages 1743-1807, October.
    19. Lipovetsky, Stan & Conklin, Michael, 2014. "Finding items cannibalization and synergy by BWS data," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 1-9.
    20. Lipovetsky, Stan & Conklin, Michael, 2014. "Best-Worst Scaling in analytical closed-form solution," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 60-68.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jotrge:v:100:y:2022:i:c:s0966692322000345. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

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

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

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

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-transport-geography .

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

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