Learn from Taiwan's public transport infrastructure

About 43% of Taipei's residents uses public transport.[1] There is much Malaysia can learn from Taiwan if we want to hit 40% public transport usage by 2030.[2] All the more so for the state of Penang that is currently implementing the Penang Transport Master Plan (PTMP).

Last week, I get to check out Taiwan's various public transport systems such as inter-city buses, inter-state high speed rail, Kaohsiung's tram, Taichung's bus network, and Taipei's metro. Here are some observations.

Inter-city, inter-state network

Travellers who land at Taipei airport can get around Taiwan's northern region easily. There is a bus terminal attached to the airport with various bus companies providing connecting services from the airport directly to other cities and states.

I took a two-hour bus from Taipei airport to Taichung, located in middle of Taiwan. I also took the high speed rail from Kaohsiung in the south to Taipei in the north. The inter-city and inter-state public transport infrastructure is excellent.

The upcoming Light Rail Transit (LRT) in Penang will serve the high-demand route from the airport to George Town, enhanced by feeder bus services to other parts of the state. Intercity transport services should be provided at the airport, where travellers who fly in can take buses to Taiping, Sungai Petani, Gurun and other towns in Perak and Kedah.

Urban public transport

Kaohsiung's tram blends well into the port city which houses the famous Pier 2 art district. The tram's low-passenger capacity and slow speed allows for plenty sightseeing.

Taichung's and Taipei's public buses have exclusive lanes to maximise their speed on congested roads. Bus stations are located in the middle of the road to minimise traffic interruption.

Nonetheless, both the on-ground tram and bus have weakness and limitation when serving high-demand route. Their weakness is the high risk of collision with pedestrians, vehicles, and other road users.

In 2018, Taipei saw 466 bus accidents (27% increase from 2017) with various causes such as failure to note people or vehicle in front of the bus, driving negligence, violation of turning, violation of traffic light signal, and not yielding to pedestrians.[3]

The limitation of on-ground tram and bus is their inefficiency as they need to stop at junction and pedestrian crossing, delaying commuting time.

Elevated or underground rail system such as LRT and metro have much lesser risk of collision. Since they do not share road space with other users, these systems are more efficient compared to on-ground tram and bus. Kaoshiung and Taipei have built rail transit to serve busy routes, complemented by tram and bus respectively. The rail transit acts as the backbone of the public transport system.

Lobbying for a single tram or bus system to serve high-demand route makes no sense. Penang Forum's demand to replace the LRT plan with tram and bus will only expose commuters to high risk of collision and short-change Penangites with an inefficient public transport system.[4]

Instead of wasting time with Penang Forum's nonsense, we should listen to the evaluation by Universiti Sains Malaysia's deputy vice chancellor and professor of transportation engineering, Dr Ahmad Farhan Mohd Sadullah: "This is why I believe having an urban rail system is imperative and urgently needed for Penang. Rail is on the highest hierarchy of public transport. Only rail will have a chance of changing the fate of public transport and provide a better option towards a demand and supply equilibrium situation."[5]

There is much for us to learn from real expert and real examples from Taiwan cities to improve our local public transport infrastructure.

References

[1] https://international.thenewslens.com/article/92882

[2]https://www.intelligenttransport.com/transport-news/90793/new-policy-looks-to-double-public-transport-usage-in-malaysia-by-2030/

[3]https://www-ws.gov.taipei/Download.ashx?u=LzAwMS9VcGxvYWQvMzkxL3JlbGZpbGUvMTk3OTAvMzMyODM3NS81MjM1NDhiYi1lOGQ0LTQwNDEtYTg3ZC00NWU0OTM5MTI3MmIucGRm&n=eTA3LnBkZg%3d%3d&icon=.pdf

[4]https://www.malaymail.com/news/what-you-think/2019/12/28/penang-bayan-lepas-lrt-moving-people-or-moving-goalposts-khoo-salma-nasutio/1822834

[5] https://www.nst.com.my/news/nation/2019/09/521306/transforming-penangs-transport-system

Facts about Penang's seafood supply, marine lives, fishermen and south reclamation project

Fishermen boats at Permatang Damar Laut, near the area earmarked for Penang South Islands

Studies on 7,800 marine species around the world’s ecosystems by global marine experts concluded that nearly 90% of global fish stocks were either fully fished or overfished.
(Source: https://tinyurl.com/skdx5qq)

The recent case of a turtle was hurt in Penang sea was not because of reclamation but because of fishermen net.
(https://tinyurl.com/wlx9hu9)

Penang’s fish supply from sea-fishing only contributes 4% to national output, which makes Penang the fourth lowest in Malaysia.
(Source: Lembaga Kemajuan Ikan Malaysia, Laporan Risikan Pasaran Tahunan 2017, p.13: https://tinyurl.com/rko2b2w)

Overfishing in Penang was so critical that in 2015 the fisheries department had to restrict the issuance of license to fishing vessels, reducing them by 30%. However, that did not deter overfishing as unlicensed fishermen continue to purge the sea.
(https://tinyurl.com/rg9rwsb)

Biggest factor affecting seafood supply and marine life is overfishing, not reclamation. It is not engineers, project managers, developers, or property owners that overfish the sea - they have their own job.

The solution to overfishing by fishermen is to shift the reliance of seafood supply from sea-fishing to aquaculture. Penang’s aquaculture production valued only at RM180 million in 2008. Ten years later in 2018, after state government's reforming the aquaculture licensing, Penang's aquaculture produce rose to RM1.3 billion – more than 600% increase.
(Sources: https://tinyurl.com/qnsouxj, https://tinyurl.com/spnhyea)

Currently, Penang is the top producer of aquaculture fish in Malaysia. Penang’s aquaculture shift is so well-known in the seafood industry that it is featured in Nikkei Asian Review (the financial newspapers with the largest circulation in the world). Penang is the only state with 50% seafood supply from aquaculture.
(https://tinyurl.com/tjt2nfy, https://tinyurl.com/qnsouxj)

Reclamation has been practiced for centuries around the world in some of the places best known for their care for the environment. For example, the Netherlands’ history of reclamation stretches back to more than 800 years ago. The estimated size of their total reclaimed land is approximately 650,000 hectares. The world’s largest reclaimed land, the Flevopolder in the Netherlands, reclaimed from 1955 to 1968 at 97,000 hectares. Netherlands is among the top ten most sustainable countries in the world.
(Sources: R. J. de Glopper, H. Smits, 'Reclamation of land from the sea and lakes in the Netherlands,' Outlook on Agriculture, vol. 8, issue 3, (1974):148; Jan Zalasiewicz, Colin N. Waters, Mark Williams, and Colin P. Summerhayes (eds.), The Anthropocene as a Geological Time Unit: A Guide to the Scientific Evidence and Current Debate (UK: Cambridge University Press, 2019), p.77; Bertelsmann Stiftung and Sustainable Development Solutions Network, Sustainable Development Report 2019, p.20: https://tinyurl.com/vn7h8o8)

Japan’s largest industrialised area, the Tokyo Bay was partially built on reclaimed land with history of more than 400 years. During the Edo era, 2,700 hectares were reclaimed over a period of 270 years. Another 6,000 hectares were reclaimed from Meiji era to the present, over 140 years. Today, there are more than 71,000 hectares of reclaimed land all over Japan.
(Sources: Takeshi Endoh, 'Historical Review of Reclamation Works in the Tokyo Bay Area,' Journal of Geography, vol. 113, issue 6, (2004), https://tinyurl.com/qlfrpx4)

Singapore’s land area was expanded by 13,800 hectares reclaimed between 1965 and 2015. Their government noted the need to add another 5,600 hectares of reclaimed land by 2030. An estimated sum of RM300 billion (SGD$100 billion) will be spent on reclamation projects for development and adapting to sea level rise. Right now, the city-state is reclaiming from sea to build the world’s largest container terminal port. And Singapore is the world's second most sustainable city after Zurich.
(Sources: https://tinyurl.com/uykxr9v, https://tinyurl.com/y3dflzjw, https://tinyurl.com/y6gz6zpo, https://tinyurl.com/lem9kg9)

Denmark will begin in 2022 to build nine artificial islands to expand the industrial area near the coast of Copenhagen to attract up to 380 new businesses and create 12,000 jobs. Denmark is the top most sustainable country in the world, with highest score in United Nations' sustainable development index, and they are developing new islands. Being sustainable and carrying out reclamation are not contradiction in term of sustainable development.
(Sources: https://tinyurl.com/ut3b75y, Bertelsmann Stiftung and Sustainable Development Solutions Network, Sustainable Development Report 2019, p.20: https://tinyurl.com/vn7h8o8)

Even among Malaysian states, reclamation for development had been practiced, on-going, and being planned to raise the socioeconomic profile of each state. To name a few examples: Kelantan’s KB Waterfront at Lembah Sireh, Melaka’s RM42 billion Melaka Gateway, Pahang’s RM15 billion Kuantan Waterfront, Perak’s Marina Island, Sabah’s KK Resort City, Johor’s Forest City, Terengganu’s Sunrise City at Kuala Nerus. All these are reclamation projects.

Countries around the world and various states in Malaysia are developing and growing through reclamation projects. Penang has seen its own development and growth through reclamation projects such as the stretch along Tun Dr Lim Chong Eu Expressway, Karpal Singh Drive, Straits Quay, Bayan Lepas Free Industrial Zone, and Weld Quay area.

Many Penangites today work, live, travel, and spend their leisure time on these reclaimed lands.

Penang despite having more than 400 hectares of reclaimed land has spotted dolphins swimming around the island. In November 2019, dolphins were spotted near the Second Penang Bridge, which is a reclaimed spot. Marine lives do grow and move around reclaimed sites.
(Source: https://tinyurl.com/sp3rrbt)

There are fishermen in the southern part of Penang who want the new islands as the project will create job opportunities for them and their children. These fishermen are featured in TV3’s program recently, and in an earlier video meeting with AnakPinang group.
(Sources: https://tinyurl.com/va9hyvj, https://tinyurl.com/t5ul5sx)

Two stakeholders’ engagement centres (‘Pusat Perkhidmatan Setempat Nelayan’) have been set up in the fishermen’s villages since 2016 to register fishermen for jobs. Currently, there are more than 600 job registrations collected in the two centres near the area earmarked for the new islands.
(Source: https://tinyurl.com/wx78xhm)

Learn from Singapore to improve public transport

Oliver Wyman Forum and University of California have recently unveiled the Urban Mobility Readiness Index that ranked cities with the best public transport system. Singapore came up on top.[1]

Separately, McKinsey & Company had also produced their own index last year to measure the best public transport system in the world. Singapore also appeared at the top.[2]

There must be something right about the city-state’s public transport that we can learn from.

The first thing to notice about Singapore’s public transport is that it is multi-modal, which means the entire infrastructure adopts several modes or types of public transport such as bus, mass rapid transit (MRT), light rail transit (LRT), and monorail.

In the late 1970s, Singapore was deliberating between having an all-bus system or a bus-rail system. Despite having a team of experts from Harvard University pushing for the all-bus system, the government opted for the more expensive bus-rail system and begun the construction of their first MRT.[3]

After the launch of the MRT in 1987, the Singaporean government studied the bus-rail system for nine years and concluded in their Land Transport Authority's 1996 White Paper that, “Only rail transport can meet the transport needs of heavy demand corridors while maintaining high travel speeds and predictability of arrival and departure times... [Cities] have opted for rail even though it is a more expensive option than the bus.”

In other words, multi-modal system may be more expensive but it provides targeted solutions that correspond to the various needs of urban mobility. For instance, a rail infrastructure (MRT or LRT) is more effective at high-demand corridor while buses work better in neighbourhood with short-distance stops. A good public transport infrastructure has various modes to complement each other to deliver the best result.

This is one reason why cities with mono-modal system such as Curitiba – even though famous for its bus rapid transit (BRT) – does not rise to the top. One size simply does not fit all.

It is high time for Malaysian cities to adopt the multi-modal principle to improve our public transport.

Comprehensive strategies like the Penang Transport Master Plan (PTMP) – comprising LRT, monorail, tram, BRT and other transport modes – is an instructive model of how public transport infrastructure should be planned locally. 

References

[1] https://www.oliverwymanforum.com/mobility/urban-mobility-readiness-index.html#

[2]https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/McKinsey/Business%20Functions/Sustainability/Our%20Insights/Elements%20of%20success%20Urban%20transportation%20systems%20of%2024%20global%20cities/Urban-transportation-systems_e-versions.ashx

[3] https://www.clc.gov.sg/docs/default-source/urban-systems-studies/uss-transport.pdf