Green Cities Sustainable Transport

Tackling Traffic Congestion in Global South CitiesA comparative study

Emad Masroor | Timothy WiranataCornell University | Spring 2016 | CRP 3840: Green Cities

IntroductionUrban transportation systems in cities of the developing world are often beset with crippling problems. From daily traffic gridlocks to unreliable public transport, from high levels of air pollution to an excessive dependence on private vehicles, these cities collectively see the whole gamut of urban issues. Often, however, the same cities are engines of regional economic growth, attracting millions of people over long periods of time and sustaining a higher standard of living than the surrounding areas.

Research QuestionWhat are some of the approaches used by large Global South cities to solve urban transportation issues? What determines the success or failure of these approaches? More importantly, why are some cities better at solving these issues, and how

can they learn from each other?

The cities under study are Bogota, Jakarta, Tehran, New Delhi and Guangzhou.

Selection of CitiesThe five cities were selected to represent a diverse range of geographical regions: Latin America, Southeast Asia, the Middle East, South Asia, and East Asia. The economies and societies within which these cities are situated are quite heterogeneous: for example, Latin America began to significantly urbanize long before Asia. Today the proportion of these five countries’ urban populations is quite diverse: ~70% in Colombia and Iran, ~50% in China and Indonesia, and ~30% in India. The cities themselves are similarly distinctive, as the following sections will show.

To varying degrees, these cities are in one way or another the lynchpin of their countries’ economies. Bogota’s population is more than 3 times larger than that of the second-largest city in Colombia. The agglomeration of Jakarta is by some counts the world’s second-largest one, second only to Tokyo. Tehran hosts more than half of Iran’s industries. New Delhi underpins the National Capital Region of India, a sprawling conurbation with a population of over 46 million. Guangzhou lies in the Pearl River Delta region, which has a GDP comparable to many global economies.

Why this topic is importantTraffic congestion appears to be a universal problem in these cities, with each of them having at some point grappled with the question of how to cope with the millions of people trying to get around. Crucially, these cities have come of age in an entirely different world from that seen by New York and London in the heyday of their growth, and therefore they have the opportunity to tackle many of the same urban challenges with more than a century of hindsight.

Rapid urbanization, the lure of the automobile, rampant air pollution, and poorly-walkable urban spaces will continue to be pressing problems for most of the world. The approaches used by these archetypical global south cities to solve these issues should be instructive for city governments throughout the world.

Case Studies

Bogota, ColombiaBogota, the capital city of Colombia, is distinctive for the high proportion of the country’s population it holds. It is more than three times the size of Medellin or Cali, the next two largest cities in the country, which shows that Bogota is clearly the paramount urban center in the country. The fact that it produces a quarter of the country’s

GDP also makes this city quite distinctive: combined with the natural convergence of the state’s

BOGOTA, COLOMBIA NEW DELHI, INDIA

Jakarta, Indonesia

Tehran, Iran

Guangzhou, China

City CountryPopulation 9,800,000 48,663,285

GDP US$ 159.850 million US$ 453.630 billion

Population Growth

2 - 9% / year 1.3% / year

apparatus in capital cities, Bogota is an ideal candidate for studying best practices in urban transportation.

TransMilenioBogota is best known for the TransMilenio, a Bus Rapid Transit system which was the brainchild of the city’s ambitious mayor Enrique Peñalosa. Opened in the year 2000, the Transmilenio is one of the world’s most successful BRT systems, with a 2013 peak load of 48,000 passengers per hour per direction (Centre for BRT Excellence), the second-highest in the world after Rio de Janerio. The system is expected to recover 100% of its operating costs, receiving no subsidy from the city government; this explains the relatively high fare of ~ $1 per trip.

Pico y PlacaThe city has also instituted a road space rationing scheme since 1998 – again championed by Peñalosa – which restricts both private and public vehicles (with some exceptions) based on their number plate, the day of the week, and the date. Four end-digits are restricted during the rush hours of 7:00 – 9:00 AM and 5:30 – 7:30 PM every weekday [1], which leads, theoretically, to a reduction of 40% in road use during these times. The rule is enforced with a $20 fine [2] for each violation, and has withstood numerous changes in city government since 1998.

Cycling InitiativesFinally, Bogota has been aggressively promoting cycling as an alternative to private automobiles. More than 300 km [3] of dedicated cycling paths have been built since 1998, reducing the city’s dependence on the automobile. On Sundays and public holidays from 7:00 AM to 2:00 PM, more than 100 km of main roads in the city are closed to motorized vehicles, allowing cyclists to take over the streets. This scheme, now institutionalized and ‘owned’ by the city, was started in the 70’s by pioneering self-described ‘counterculture radicals’ [4] who cycled ostentatiously through the streets to promote an alternative to automobiles. Today, the city government facilitates this Colombian tradition by closing the streets, opening them up to an estimated 1-2 million cyclists each holiday.

Jakarta, IndonesiaJakarta is the capital city of the Republic of Indonesia, hosting over 10 million people in the heart of the most populous and largest city in Southeast Asia. As part of the developing world, Jakarta has grown to be one of the major globalization forces in Asia: contributing more than 13% of its GDP to the total of Indonesia’s total GDP. According to a study by A.T. Kearney, it is projected that in 10 or 20 years, Jakarta will challenge global cities of today to attract businesses from worldwide companies. (A.T. Kearney Emerging Cities Outlook, 2014) Due to rapid improvements in terms

City CountryPopulation 30,214,303 258,714,000

GDP US$ 148.379 million US$ 975.271 billion

Population Growth

3.7% / year 1.2% / year

of human capital and healthcare quality, Jakarta is an obvious choice for conducting a detailed analysis on sustainable transportation initiatives.

Furthermore, Jakarta’s governance structure involves a mix of decentralized and centralized approaches. “This means that provisional decisions are made by a public entity, which then is further implemented in the production stage by another entity, in this case local governments (the Provincial Government of Jakarta/the Jakarta Transportation Department and surrounding district governments of Jakarta). (Holzhacker et al., 2015) Notoriously known for immense traffic congestion, Jakarta faced growing challenges in the form of increased usage of cars and motorcycles. While the total road area has remained relatively unchanged for the past 10 – 20 years, the number of private vehicle usage is constantly increasing. (Figure below) Since the early 1990s, Jakarta has implemented numerous strategies to alleviate problems tightly connected with population growth. Some notable examples would be the TransJakarta BRT service, the electrified rail system, and the traffic restraint zone. We will look further into these initiatives on the next few paragraphs.

Figure 1

TransJakarta BRT Service TransJakarta is a bus rapid transit (BRT) system developed for Jakarta’s citizens that signals a breakthrough in Asia as the first full BRT system equipped with “physically separated bus-only lanes, at-level boarding platforms and pre-paid ticketing.” (NYC Global Partners, 2012) The main objective of the project is to provide a fast public transportation for commuters, while improving pedestrian facilities, land-use options and reducing greenhouse gases. The TransJakarta BRT system was Jakarta’s response to Bogota’s TransMilenio BRT system. The

operation started back in 2004 and TransJakarta now has a total of 545 buses, 12 corridors, 11 routes and covers more than 172 kilometers (107 miles) of road length, causing it to become the longest and most extensive bus rapid transit system in the world.

Seven years after its implementation, Transjakarta accrued 360,000 passengers per day, a 32 percent increase from the previous year. The government and researchers calculated that the BRT service had saved “more than 54,000 tonnes of CO2 emission, the equivalent of taking 10,000 cars off the road.” (NYC Global Partners, 2012) Despite its effectiveness in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, TransJakarta still has problems with slow boarding and alighting movements caused by the limited number of doors. Furthermore, the introduction of a bus lane increases traffic congestion in mixed lanes which is contrary to the BRT system’s purpose. Further research as well as a collaboration with the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP) are currently ongoing with enhancements to improve and expand the BRT service to other cities in Indonesia.

Electrified Rail System The Electrified Rail System or commonly called KA Commuter Jabodetabek is Jakarta’s only rail-based transit system, as the mass rapid transit (MRT) and light rapid transit (LRT) systems are still under construction. This rail system was started in 2000 and is designed for commuters who travel back and forth between Jakarta and its surrounding municipalities like Bogor, Depok, Tangerang and Bekasi while also providing services to surrounding cities. The Commuter has a total of 80 stations and 6 lines throughout the Greater Jakarta region. It also has a daily ridership of around 850,000 and up to 200 million passengers per year. Although the Commuter has provided a constant and efficient transportation service, it has security measures and has not done enough on alleviating traffic congestion in Jakarta.

Traffic Restraint Zone The traffic restraint zone or more commonly known as the 3-in-1 system is a policy implemented by Jakarta’s government in 1992 as an attempt to reduce traffic congestion on Jakarta’s main arterial roads. The policy prohibits cars with fewer than three passengers from driving down two of Jakarta’s busiest avenues at two rush-hour periods, 6:30am – 10:00am and 4:00pm – 7:00pm. The latter time period was only started in 2004 after the BRT system was implemented. While the policy is certainly a good step forward, it has not changed the overall traffic pattern of Jakarta. Several issues rose to reduce, or more blatantly, cancel out the effectiveness of the 3-in-1 system. Due to manual enforcement, the policy faces a lack of consistency and sometimes an inadequate number of enforcers. Drivers also figured out a loophole by hiring children to serve as 3-in-1 traffic jockeys, paying children a sum of money and dropping them off at the end of the traffic restraint zone.

Tehran, IranTehran, the capital city of Iran is also the busiest city of Iran. With a population of around 9 million people and 16 million in the greater metropolitan area, Tehran have much to boast compared to other cities in Iran. Hosting about 20 percent of Iran’s population, Tehran controls about a quarter of Iran’s public-sector workforce and over 45 percent of Iran’s major industrial firms. (CSIS, 2008) As the country’s main economic powerhouse, Tehran contributes a huge 24 percent of the country’s GDP in 2012. Furthermore, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) has predicted that Iran’s economic growth will increase by 4 percent in 2016, which means that Tehran, at its center, will be a significant force that will bring the country to new heights. Showing their determination, Tehran was actually voted as the second runner-up for the Sustainable Transport Award in 2011 for having aggressive policies aimed to successfully implement a broad set of new transportation options. (McKone, 2011)

Urban RailwayTehran’s city-wide railway system or commonly called Tehran Metro is a rapid transit system that serves as the primary transportation for Tehran’s commuters. With 5 metro lines currently in operation, the Tehran Metro has improved its citizen’s quality of life by providing a safe and accessible transportation system with limited resources available. This rapid transit system carries over 3 million passengers a day throughout a total of 170 km (110 mi) of rail length. Since the year 2000, the Tehran Metro has done significantly well in dealing with pollution, mobility and demographic problems.

BRT SystemTehran recently invested on a huge Bus Rapid Transit project in order to better facilitate the mobility of Tehran’s dense population. Officially opened in 2008, Tehran’s BRT has a network length of approximately 130 km (80 mi), transporting over 1.8 million passengers on a daily basis along 10 well-extended BRT lines. The mayor at that time, Mohammad-Baqer Qalibaf seized the opportunity to create a more sustainable Tehran by developing innovative transportation infrastructures. As a result, “on the two most recent BRT lines to open, the number of people using public transport increased by 31% and 35% respectively and passengers received a 24% and 42% time savings respectively on their trips than from what they were using before.” (ITDP, 2011)

City CountryPopulation ~ 9,000,000 78,988,000

GDP US$ 127 billion US$ 432.092 billion

Population Growth 1.2% / year 1.3% / year

New Delhi, IndiaNew Delhi is the capital of India and its second-largest city. By some accounts, New Delhi is the most polluted city in the world, which has led to a significant global spotlight on air pollution in the city. New Delhi is instructive because it is governmentally separated from a number of satellite towns which are in fact constitutive components of its urban fabric. The geographical spread of the city has been exacerbated by the presence of these satellite towns, giving New Delhi a pronounced dependence on the automobile. In this backdrop, the city government recently proposed and tested for 15 days a road space rationing scheme which would only allow half the usual number of private vehicles on the streets every day. The urban agglomeration associated with New Delhi – the National Capital Region – is reported to have a GDP of $47.67 billion in 2009-10, accounting for 7.1% of the country’s GDP.

Delhi MetroStudies for a Mass Rapid Transit system in New Delhi began in 1969, but construction on the first line did not start until 1998, with the first line being opened in 2002. The Delhi Metro, as it is called, had an annual ridership of 870 million in 2015. Average daily ridership has grown from 124,000 in 2005 to 2.4 million in 2015.[5] Delhi’s MRT is one of the largest mass transit systems in the world by total length of track, with a total of 213 km of lines, which extend to four satellite cities outside the municipality of Delhi, in the National Capital Region. The system is operated by a state-owned company, owned equally by the Government of India and the Government of Delhi.

BRTNew Delhi experimented with a Bus Rapid Transit system, which was opened in 2008 in anticipation of the 2010 Commonwealth Games held in the city. However, technical difficulties and poor implementation of the core tenet of BRT – a segregated right-of-way – meant that the system was plagued by inefficiencies. In January 2016, the city government announced that it was dismantling the corridor entirely.

Road Space RationingThe city has recently begun experimenting with a road space rationing scheme, which would only allow odd-numbered vehicles to drive on odd dates and even-numbered ones on even dates. The scheme was implemented for 15 days in January 2016 and then again for 15 days in

City CountryPopulation 21,753,486 1,293,057,000

GDP US$ 67 billion US$ 2,447.322 billion

Population Growth ~ 4% / year 1.2% / year

April, with the stated purpose of studying the effectiveness of the measure as a long-term solution.

Guangzhou, ChinaGuangzhou is variously reported as the second- or third- largest city in China by population and an economic powerhouse of the Guangdong Province of South China. Guangzhou is distinctive for its position as part of a large urban agglomeration called the Pearl River Delta, which has been described as the largest urban agglomeration in the world [6]. As such, there is a wide discrepancy between the population of what is administratively considered Guangzhou and that of the actual metropolitan area, which has important implications for the transportation system in the city. Despite a staggering GDP of $237 billion [7], Guangzhou is responsible for only 2.3% of China’s GDP. The entire Pearl River Delta region, however, comprises 8.5% of China’s GDP [8], which combined with adjacent Hong Kong would make the larger Guangzhou region one of the most productive regions in the world.

MetroGuangzhou operates a traditional mass rapid transit or MRT system, which is a combination of elevated and underground rail tracks built in the style of western European and American cities. The MRT was conceived in the 1960’s, but did not materialize as an actual project until the 90’s, with the first line finally being built in 1998. The daily ridership of Guangzhou’s MRT was reported in 2013 to be 5.63 million [9], with a reported annual ridership of 2.4 billion passengers in 2015 [10].

BRTThe city has also recently opened a single corridor of a bus rapid transit system, which began operation in 2010 and in 2013 had a peak load of 29,000 passengers per hour per direction, for an annual ridership of ~ 2.55 million [11]. The city is one of the few in the world whose BRT systems have been awarded the Gold standard by the Institute for Transportation Development and Policy, a nongovernmental organization which has developed a worldwide standard for assessing different BRT systems. Guangzhou’s BRT system is integrated with greenways and bike lanes on both sides of the corridor as well as a bike sharing program, which provides parking near bus stations to encourage a combination of cycling and public transport.

Ownership RestrictionsGuangzhou, following the lead of other Chinese megacities, has instituted restrictions on the ownership of cars in the city since June 2012. Under this system, there is an annual quota –

City CountryPopulation 23,900,000 1,381,134,000

GDP US$ 275.13 billion US$ 12,235.115 billion

Population Growth

6.2% / year 0.5% / year

120,000 – of cars which can be bought in the city, which are sold through a combination of lotteries and auctions [12]. There is a separate lottery for alternative energy vehicles – 1,000 a month – to encourage a shift to hybrid and electric vehicles. In order to make this system more equitable, even those who already owned cars in June 2012 must also apply for licenses over a period of 10 years and go through the same process as new buyers.

Analysis of Urban Transport InitiativesThe following table summarizes the initiatives currently in place in these five cities. At this point, it would make sense to add a ‘Congestion Index’ or a single number representing a judgement of the city’s transportation infrastructure. However, most commonly cited congestion indices [13] fail to comprehensively cover cities in the developing world, and therefore cannot be meaningfully used for comparing these five cities.

Bogota Jakarta Tehran New Delhi GuangzhouBus Rapid

Transit ● ● ● ○ ●

Rail-based mass transit ● ● ● ●

Road Space Rationing ● ● ○

Ownership Restrictions ●

Table 1: Summary of urban transport initiatives taken by the five cities under study.

Ownership Restrictions and Road Space RationingIn order to solve recurring issues on rising rates of car ownership and heavy traffic, local governments around the world have tried implementing strict regulations like ownership restrictions and road space rationing. Bogota and Jakarta have enforced road space rationing policies in the “Pico y Placa” and “3-in-1 system” respectively, with the former proving to be more effective than the latter. Bogota’s “Pico y Placa” have brought a significant change to the traffic pattern in the city as road usage have been reduced by a huge 40% during the specified time periods. Although Jakarta devised a notable policy, it has shown some weakness in the form of manual enforcement and lack of citizen’s cooperation. New Delhi has also shown their determination by experimenting on an “odd-even plate number” scheme to minimize road use in the heart of the city. However, it is still unclear when the policy will be initiated in full.

Guangzhou, on the other hand, has recently established a vehicle ownership restriction policy, taking examples from several Chinese megacities. An annual quota of 120,000 is set for the number of cars allowed to be bought in the city. On July 2013, the Guangzhou government declared the policy to be a long term regulation and will keep an eye on the overall outcome. However, several sources have mentioned that Guangzhou’s residents have been buying cars from neighboring jurisdictions to avoid having to comply with the policy.

Mass Transit SystemsThe cities we studied repose overwhelming confidence in mass transit systems. Three of

them – Guangzhou, Jakarta, and Tehran – have both a large-capacity rail-based system as well as a smaller-capacity BRT network.

Comparison of MRT and BRTWhile it is true that all forms of mass transit in these cities have been put in place quite

recently – the BRT systems since the year 2000 and the MRT systems since the 1990s – the two systems represent divergent approaches to the city which amount to a generational shift in city planning. The planning and conceptualization of London Underground-esque light rail transit systems in these cities began as early as the 1960s [14][15][16] – New Delhi first studied the possibility in 1969, Guangzhou in 1961, Tehran in the early 70s, and Jakarta in the 80s – even though most of these systems were only built in the 90s. On the other hand, the idea of Bus Rapid Transit only took hold after Curitiba in Brazil and Bogota, Colombia popularized it in the late 1990s, and took off much more rapidly: in each of the five cities studied, a BRT system typically took less than a decade from the first planning to laying the first corridor. Thus it can be seen that the planning–execution trajectory of light rail mass transit is very different than that of BRT.

MRT BRTProposed Opened ‘Delay’ Proposed Opened ‘Delay’

Bogota17 - - - 1998 2000 2 yearsJakarta1819 1985 2017 32 years 2001 2004 3 yearsTehran2021 1971 2001 30 years 2005 2008 3 yearsNew Delhi 1969 2002 33 years 2004 2008 4 years

Guangzhou22 1961 1997 36 years 2005 2010 5 yearsTable 2: Comparison of BRT and MRT completion times.

Versatility of BRTThe shorter timeframe – and, of course, lower capital costs – often associated with Bus

Rapid Transit allows these systems to be versatile and to eventually overcome their own shortcomings. Jakarta’s BRT was independently ‘reviewed’ by the ITDP (Institute for Transportation Development and Policy December 2003) even before it began operation, in order to point out that the system was not likely to be financially viable because of a shortage of demand, and that its capacity was nowhere near enough to meet the city’s needs. Once the system had been built, the ITDP continued to provide advice on ways to improve the network, with a November 2007 presentation to the government (ITDP November 2007) of Jakarta urging it to ‘increase capacity significantly’, along with other detailed recommendations. Today, Jakarta’s is the longest BRT network in the world at 207 km of corridors (BRT Centre of

Excellence), and is regularly cited as a model for ‘Best Practices’ in the implementation of BRT systems (New York City Global Partners).

Lessons from a scrapped BRTThe ability to construct a mass transit system quickly and at a low cost can be a double-

edged sword. New Delhi, for example, planned a BRT system in 2004 in anticipation of the 2010 Commonwealth Games, but the system was not sufficiently able to take root in the urban landscape of the city, and is currently in the process of being dismantled. While numerous technical issues were raised highlighting the poor quality of the system compared with other cities (Institute for Transportation Development and Policy July2014), the Delhi BRT’s failure was ultimately due to well-coordinated opposition from city residents who were irked by the seemingly disproportionate road space being given to public transport while the rest of the roads remained congested just the same. A petition was entered in the High Court asking for the barriers separating the bus lane from the rest of the traffic to be torn down, stating:

“There should not be any exclusive lane for buses … If one bus goes on the bus lane, 40 vehicles go on the other lane. They will naturally form a long queue.” (Lahiri, "Wall Street Journal", 2012)

That such anti-populist rhetoric could eventually succeed in getting its way in a democratic society with regular local, state and national elections, to the detriment of common citizens, the vast majority of whom do not own an automobile, is at first sight bizarre. Clearly, the New Delhi BRT failed at two different levels – firstly, it could not convince car owners to switch to public transport, and secondly, it failed to galvanize enough support even amongst public transport users.

Table 3: Comparison of the BRT systems under study. Delhi was removed from the database. (Centre for BRT Excellence)

It is instructive to compare New Delhi with Bogota or Guangzhou. Both China and Colombia have higher rates of car ownership than India, but the latter two were able to successfully implement a BRT system which benefits public transport users to the detriment of private automobile owners. Guangzhou’s BRT, though short at only one corridor of 22 km, earned a Gold rating based on the ITDP’s standard for BRT systems and focused on building a viable alternative to private automobiles by integrating the corridor with cycling-friendly infrastructure. At the same time, the core principle of a BRT, a segregated busway, was followed to the letter, which helped the system attain a speed of 23 km/h (compared to New Delhi’s 13 (ITDP July2014).

ConclusionsAs much as high-quality public transport, cities need political leadership which can

articulate and advocate for egalitarian public spaces if BRT systems are to succeed. This is perhaps best summed up in the words of Enrique Penalosa:

An advanced city is not one where even the poor use cars, but rather one where even the rich use public transport. (“Semana”, 2011)

Cities in the Global South have been paving the way for new ways of thinking about transportation. These cities face challenges that are reminiscent of late 19th century London and New York, cities whose great innovation was the underground subway. The subway – or more generally light rail transit – effectively carried American and European cities into the modern world, and in the mid-to-late-20th century this model began to be emulated by cities in the developing world as well. As private automobile use continued to increase, however, many global south cities seem to have realized that the tried-and-tested model may no longer be enough.

Global South cities are now using a variety of measures to decrease traffic congestion. The more obvious ones are mass transit systems, which continue to be the backbone of most cities’ transport systems as the primary alternative to the car. At the same time, global south cities are bridging the gap between public and private transport by focusing on BRT systems and greenways which encourage a democratization of the road itself. These measures, combined with more direct measures such as road space rationing and ownership restrictions which encourage citizens to consider alternatives to the car, may well show the way to a new, more livable kind of city.

References1. http://www.alcaldiabogota.gov.co/sisjur/normas/Norma1.jsp?i=1937

2. http://www.ecoplan.org/votebogota2000/general/PicoPlaca.PDF

3. http://www.c40.org/case_studies/bogot%C3%A1%E2%80%99s-cicloruta-is-one-of-the-most-

comprehensive-cycling-systems-in-the-world

4. http://www.bicycling.com/culture/advocacy/how-colombian-cycling-tradition-changed-world

5. http://www.delhimetrorail.com/OtherDocuments/DELHI1-92english.pdf

6. http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2015/01/26/world-bank-report-provides-new-data-

to-help-ensure-urban-growth-benefits-the-poor

7. http://www.chinaknowledge.com/CityInfo/City.aspx?Region=Coastal&City=Guangzhou

8. http://www.hsbc.com/~/media/HSBC-com/InvestorRelationsAssets/investor-update-2015/asia-china-

and-the-pearl-river-delta

9. http://www.gzmtr.com/ygwm/gsgk/qynb/annual_report_2013.pdf

10. http://www.gzmtr.com/ygwm/xwzx/gsxw/201602/t20160201_43567.html

11. BRT Data

12. http://www.lta.gov.sg/ltaacademy/doc/13Sep040-Feng_CarOwnershipControl.pdf

13. TomTom, INRIX Traffic Scorecard, Castrol’s Start-Stop Index

14. http://metro.tehran.ir/Default.aspx?tabid=150

15. http://www.jakartamrt.com/tentang-mrt-jakarta/id

16. http://web.archive.org/web/20090824042320/http://web.iitd.ac.in/~tripp/delhibrts/metro/Metro/

message%20in%20a%20metro%20-%20Matti.pdf

17. http://www.transmilenio.gov.co/en/articles/history-0

18. http://www1.nyc.gov/assets/globalpartners/downloads/pdf/Jakarta_BusTransit.pdf

19. http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2013/10/10/jokowi-leads-mrt-ground-breaking-ceremony.html

20. http://en.tehran.ir/Default.aspx?tabid=103

21. http://www.globalmasstransit.net/archive.php?id=7086

22. https://www.itdp.org/where-we-work/china/guangzhou/

Works CitedSustainable Transport Award cities: Tehran. Institute for Transportation and Development Policy, 2011. Web. 14 May 2016. <https://www.itdp.org/sustainable-transport-award-cities-tehran/>

2011 Sustainable Transport Award: Tehran Boasts Major Achievements. The City Fix, 2011. Web. 14 May 2016. <http://thecityfix.com/blog/2011-sustainable-transport-award-tehran-boasts-major-achievements/>

The US, Israel, Arab States and a Nuclear Iran. Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS), 2008. Web. 14 May 2016. <http://csis.org/files/media/csis/pubs/081006_iran_nuclear.pdf>

IMF forecasts Iran’s GDP to grow by 4% in 2016. Tehran Times, 2016. Web. 14 May 2016. <http://www.tehrantimes.com/news/300580/IMF-forecasts-Iran-s-GDP-to-grow-by-4-in-2016>

2014 Global Cities Index and Emerging Cities Outlook: Global Cities, Present and Future. A.T. Kearney, 2014. Web. 14 May 2016. <https://www.atkearney.com/documents/10192/4461492/Global+Cities+Present+and+Future-GCI+2014.pdf/3628fd7d-70be-41bf-99d6-4c8eaf984cd5>

Manila and Jakarta to overtake Singapore as world's top global cities in 20 years, study says. Vulcan Post, 2014. Web. 14 May 2016. <https://vulcanpost.com/8774/manila-and-jakarta-to-overtake-singapore-as-worlds-global-cities/>

Traffic Restraint in Jakarta: stagnant after 14 years. Rini, D.A., et al., 2006. Web. 14 May 2016. <http://megaslides.com/doc/1067269/slide-1>

Jakarta Urban Transport Problems and Their Environmental Impacts. Jakarta Local Government, n.d. Web. 14 May 2016. <http://www.ui.ac.id/download/apru-awi/jakarta-local-goverment.pdf>

Jakarta Investment Opportunity. Jakarta Investment and Promotion Board, n.d. Web. 14 May 2016. <http://www.confindustria.it/Aree/NewsPub.nsf/9E898D4189EDE116C1257C0E002FD5E1/$File/JAKARTA.pdf >

Best Practice: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) System. New York City Global Partners, 2012. Web. 14 May 2016. <http://www1.nyc.gov/assets/globalpartners/downloads/pdf/Jakarta_BusTransit.pdf>

Holzhacker, R. L., et al. Decentralization and Governance in Indonesia. Springer, 2015. Web. 14 May 2016.

Indonesia’s GDP at 4.73 percent in Q3. The Jakarta Post, 2015. Web. 14 May 2016. <http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2015/11/05/indonesias-gdp-473-percent-q3.html>

New York City Global Partners. Best Practice: Bus Rapid Transit System, 2012.

BRT Centre of Excellence, EMBARQ, IEA and SIBRT. “Global BRTData.” Version 3.12. Last modified: 04/13/2016. Available at: http://www.brtdata.org

Institute for Transportation Development and Policy, Trans-Jakarta Bus Rapid Transit System Technical Review, December 2003

Institute for Transportation Development and Policy, Bus Rapid Transit: How Delhi Compares, July2014

Lahiri, Tripti. "Delhi Journal: The Big, Bad BRT." Wall Street Journal. 25 May 2012. Web. 15 May 2016.