Examination of Selected Public Transportation Modes in Addis Ababa City
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2020-03
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Addis Ababa University
Abstract
Addis Ababa is the capital city of Ethiopia with population of 5 million and the fastest growing
economy in Africa. However, urban transportation system is one of emerging problem in Addis
Ababa. The increasing public transportation demand, mobility, ridership, accessibility, capacity,
congestion, affordability, health and safety problems need urgent solution. Currently the city’s
administration is on the way to introduce public transport like Bus rapid transit. Even though the
Light Rail Transit has operational, maintenance, accessibility problems it caters more than 120,000
riders per day, on average. However, quantitative and qualitative benefits and costs are not well
studied from the city`s context. The general objective of this study is to examine Addis Ababa Light
Rail Transit and Bus Rapid Transit systems against multifaceted criteria. The first objective is the
comparison of life cycle cost-benefit analysis among AA LRT and AA BRT. The second objective is to
examine the effect of AA LRT infrastructure`s on the surrounding built-up activities using a selected
line from Megenagna to Sealite-Mihiret.
The multifaceted LCCA is conducted for 30 years and using a discount rate of 10.23% to convert
costs and benefits into present values (2019 USD. The result shows that that the NPV of AA BRT with
trolley is 23,340,539.98USD/km which is greater than the other two alternatives. AA LRT has
12,752,547.77USD/km and AA BRT with diesel buses has 7,537,666.36USD/KM of NPV. The Benefit
to Cost Ratio (BCR) of AA BRT is 2 and 1.5 per km for trolley and diesel buses which is higher than
that of the LRT with 1.24 per km. Sensitivity analysis is also conducted by increasing selected costs
and decreasing selected benefits resulting in a decreased value of NPV which is positive and BCR
which is greater than one. To attain the second objective, 384 questionnaires were distributed for
residents located around 500m distance from the both sides of the selected LRT corridor. The result
shows for more than 71% and 68% of the respondents, there is a longer distance and time
respectively whether they use walking and/or other public transportation modes after LRT is
constructed. 82% of the residents reacted that the infrastructure increases the width of the roadway
which inhibits their crossing movement and decreased their neighborhood interaction.
Finally it is concluded that the AA BRT with trolley buses the most cost effective option. But by
enhancing the annual benefits of the MRTs through simple cost effective modifications to attract more
passengers, their introduction and future expansion is more recommendable according to this study`s
result. Additional recommendations from the result of sensitivity analysis proven that the agencies
that manage these mass rapid transit systems should consider adding up more benefit categories and
more benefit amounts to increase viability, efficiency, cost effectiveness and affordability. On the
other hand, the result from the estimation of AALRT`s impact on non-users shows that the
infrastructure has negative impact on them. But this can be solved by conducting proper planning
through assessing its effect on surrounding users before expanding it.
Evaluating impacts only on the direct users of the mode and the agency is not a correct way of
assessment. So, before implementation of any mass rapid transit systems within the city, it is
recommendable to also examine their monetary and non-monetary impacts on external and internal
users in order to reduce or alleviate the corresponding negative effects. It should be encouraged to
attain a sustainable development in all public transportation modes in general. Therefore, this study
can be used as an input for Policy and planning decisions which often involve economic analysis to
determine whether a particular Mass Rapid Transit option is cost-effective or efficient, viable and
which option provides the greatest overall benefits.
Description
Keywords
Addis Ababa, Bus Rapid Transit, Light Rail Transit, Life cycle cost, Life cycle benefit, Comprehensive examination