Technology for improved Public Bus Transport

There is a need is to bring in efficiency in STUs; to educate back office staff & train them to use the system/data.

– Nicolas Morael

Ashar: Nicolas you have been working extensively in Paris, how is the partnership working? How different is it in the partnership between technology service provider and a transit agency?

Nicolas: Whether it is with STUs in Paris or in any other country, when tenders are finalized and the authorities ensure that when the next contract would come in, it will have to integrate with the previous system. Today in Paris, we have a fully integrated transport with one smart card allowing one to travel in all modes of transport– tramway, railway, metro and buses.

Bhargav: A classic example is the ITS project in the city of Hyderabad. The JNNURM-II buses now come with on-board devices, like CCTV cameras, VMS, and Public Information System. JNNURM-I buses which came before the JNNURM-II had their own software, so it was easy for them to integrate with their own hardware. But now when the JNNURM-II or the AMRUT buses will be soon introduced, it will be difficult to integrate with the former JNNURM-I software. That’s where the huge gap has to be addressed soon.

Ashar: Today highways are built on the BOT model. So, the liability is transferred and a share of the pie is divided either way. Do you think it is feasible to actually look at models like this? Will risks and rewards model work? Because in a highway project there is a very clear risk and reward. But then it is also important to start looking at different models. What kind of challenges does a service provider face that can be a deterrent?

Kohli: I think as the requirement from the service expectation changes, the service delivery models would have to be changed like it happened in the highways and airport area. So there is a natural progression; perhaps we need to think about how risks associated with public transport operations or technological elements of public transport operation can be framed out. We need to be cognizant here. Whoever is putting money in front of the government, he is not putting his own money. It is going to be a ten percent, twenty percent, thirty percent equity and the rest of it is a debt which the bank will have to provide. So, a clear investment case for a bankable project within public transport has to be created.

Bhargav: I think why we vendors or consultants have not thought a lot about this is we have it in our own clause; we have these SLAs that are often weird and are something which we can’t even think of. They say, if your software does not load in one minute, you have an SLA of ‘X’ rupees per day or something. So, the existing parameters are really very stringent and they do not allow or give that open mind to a consultant or a vendor to even consider the BOT kind of direction.

There are SPVs which have been set up for this purpose but I think the SPVs are more concentrated towards the BRTS. I have not seen an SPV coming in specifically for an ITS or for planning and scheduling. For example, why can’t Hubli-Dharwad or the HDBRTS company which has been set up as an SPV to take care of the implementation of the BRTS, take care of the ITS as well? Why can’t it do a planning and scheduling on the BOT model? It is possible, if the government also supports.