URBANISATION AND THE CHALLENGE OF IDEAL TRANSIT SOLUTIONS

THE CONTEXT:  India will add roughly 300 million new urban residents by 2047; the Economic Survey (2024-25) flags that only 37 percent of today’s urbanites enjoy “easy access” (≤500 m walk) to mass transit, compared with >50 percent in Brazil and China. The Government’s flagship responses—PM e-Bus Sewa-Payment Security Mechanism (PSM) and PM Electric Drive Revolution in Innovative Vehicle Enhancement (PM e-DRIVE)—aim to seed 38,000 and 14,000 electric buses, respectively, but India’s headline deficit remains stark: 200,000 buses required vs. c. 35,000 on the road.

THE BACKGROUND: Urban transport policy in India has evolved from the National Urban Transport Policy (NUTP, 2006, revised 2014), which initially shifted the metric from “moving vehicles to moving people,” to the Gati Shakti National Master Plan (2021) that seeks multimodal integration. Yet capital-intensive metro systems still dominate budgetary outlays while lower-cost surface modes, such as trams, trolleybuses and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), receive intermittent attention.

Theoretical Framework

• • Mobility Pyramid: Prioritises walking, cycling, public transport, intermediate public transport (IPT) and lastly private vehicles.
  • Transit-Oriented Development (TOD): 500-800 m catchment of high-capacity transit, mixed land use, and reduced parking norms to collapse trip lengths.
  • Life-Cycle Cost (LCC) Analysis: Captures upfront capital, operations & maintenance (O&M), energy, externalities (GHG, congestion). An India-specific LCC study shows trams offer 45 percent net surplus over 70 years, while e-buses register an 82 percent net loss.

WHAT-WHY-HOW:

• • What – A sustainable, inclusive, fiscally viable urban transit mix.
  • Why – To realise demographic dividend, decarbonise transport (14 percent of India’s CO₂), and avoid congestion costs (≥4 percent of GDP in large cities).
  • How – By aligning land-use, technology choice, and financing instruments with behavioural nudges and governance reforms.

TECHNICAL DETAILS & SPECIFICATIONS:

THE CURRENT SCENARIO:

• • Metro‐centric funding: 20 cities with operational/under-construction metro; cost recovery problematic outside Delhi; fare hikes quickly depress ridership (BEST Mumbai ridership –10 percent post-fare rise).
  • e-Bus push: FAME-II subsidies (₹35,000 crore) catalyzed procurement, but litigation and supply-chain delays hindered rollout (e.g., Chandigarh tender revision).
  • Emergent Tram Revival: Kochi poised to pilot India’s first modern light-tram corridor, leveraging offset grant from German KfW and carbon-credit financing.

THE SIGNIFICANCE:

• • Economic: Every rupee invested in urban public transport returns ~₹ 4 via productivity, health and time savings (NITI Aayog, 2023).
  • Environmental: Shifting 20 percent of two-wheeler trips to electric buses could avoid 6 Mt CO₂ annually by 2030 (MoHUA model).
  • Equity: Affordable mass transit reduces “spatial poverty traps”, improving women’s labour-force participation by up to 15 percentage points.

INDIAN POLICY & INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK

1. NUTP 2006/2014: “Move people, not vehicles”, service benchmarks for frequency, reliability, universal design.

2. Metro Rail Policy 2017: Viability gap funding only after proven economic internal rate of return ≥14 percent.

3. Smart Cities Mission (2015-25): ~25 percent of total project value devoted to Area-Based Development and Pan-City mobility ICT.

4. PM e-Bus Sewa-PSM (2024): Viability gap @ ₹ 24/km for 10-yr Gross Cost Contracts; ₹ 3,435 crore outlay.

5. PM e-DRIVE (2025): Targeting 14,000 e-buses in nine Tier-I cities; 1,10,000 e-rickshaws for feeder.

6. National Common Mobility Card (NCMC): Interoperable ticketing for metro, bus, suburban rail.

Global Perspective & Lessons

• • France – 25 cities have revived trams since 1990; Lyon covers 60 percent of O&M costs from the farebox, balancing this with a parking levy hypothecated to transit.
  • China – Integrates land auction revenues with metro funding; TOD around metro stations captures up to 30 percent of value-increment.
  • Brazil – Curitiba’s BRT pioneered trunk-feeder design and zoning along high-capacity corridors; ~54 percent of residents within 500 m of a BRT stop.
  • Europe – Light Rail & Tram ridership equals metro + regional rail combined (10.4 billion trips / year, 2018).

THE ISSUES:

THE WAY FORWARD:

• • Empower Unified Metropolitan Transport Authorities (UMTAs): Notify UMTAs under the Metro Rail (Amendment) Act with statutory planning, fare-setting and data-sharing power; integrate land-use, parking and transit plans into a single Master Mobility Plan within three years.
  • Adopt Mode-agnostic Life-Cycle Cost Tendering: Mandate LCC-based procurement—covering carbon and congestion externalities—for all urban transit projects; pilot competitive bids between tram, BRT and e-bus corridors on identical alignments.
  • Value-Capture & Green Finance Toolbox: Expand Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) levy, betterment charges and municipal green bonds to finance 30 percent of CapEx; create a sovereign guarantee facility to de-risk climate-linked bonds for Tier-2 cities.
  • National Last-Mile Connectivity Mission: Subsidise e-rickshaws, bicycle-sharing and pedestrian infrastructure within 1-km radius of transit hubs, funded via congestion pricing in central business districts.
  • Fare Policy & Social Protection: Implement targeted mobility vouchers via Aadhaar-linked DBT for low-income riders; adopt dynamic distance-cum-time pricing to optimise load factors without penalising the poor.
  • Domestic Manufacturing & Skills: Launch a Production-Linked Incentive (PLI) sub-scheme for tram and trolley-bus components; integrate e-mobility modules in ITIs and polytechnics; certify 50,000 EV mechanics by 2028.
  • Data-Driven Operations: Enforce open-API standards; establish a National Urban Mobility Observatory for real-time ridership, emissions and service quality dashboards to inform adaptive scheduling.
  • Climate Co-benefit Integration: Align city transport plans with State Action Plans on Climate Change; mandate mode-shift impact assessment (MSIA) as part of Environment Impact Assessment for urban transit projects.
  • Gender-Responsive Design: Reserve operating subsidies for operators meeting safety KPIs—CCTV coverage, panic buttons, well-lit stations; create “pink routes” with timed feeder services matching women’s employment hubs.
  • Urban Freight & Mixed-Traffic Management: Designate off-peak freight windows and e-cargo bike zones to unclog mixed traffic corridors, thereby improving average bus speeds from current 12 km/h to target 20 km/h.

THE CONCLUSION:

Urban mobility is no longer a mere engineering challenge; it is the crucible where fiscal prudence, social equity, and climate stewardship intersect. A calibrated shift towards life-cycle-efficient surface modes, such as trams—complemented, not replaced, by metros—can deliver a Just Transition on Wheels, steering Viksit Bharat towards inclusive, net-zero urban futures.

UPSC PAST YEAR QUESTION:

Q. How is efficient and affordable urban mass transport key to the rapid economic development of India? 2019

MAINS PRACTICE QUESTION:

Q. Discuss the relative merits of metro rail, electric buses and modern tramways as tools for sustainable urban mobility in India.

SOURCE:

https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/urbanisation-and-the-challenge-of-ideal-transit-solutions/article69688213.ece