ACCESSIBILITY EFFECTS OF RELOCATION AND HOUSING PROJECT FOR THE URBAN POOR IN AHMEDABAD, INDIA
A/Prof. Mark Zuidgeest
South African Cities Network/University of Pretoria, 09 April 2018
“Ability to readily move people from place to place”
Key-words: Networks and modes: how to get there? Speed: how fast? Cost: how expensive?
Indicators of success: Vehicle Kilometres Travelled (VKT)
In other words: maximizing movement
MOBILITY
Easiness to enter, reach, and use (aka access)
The ease of reaching goods, services, activities and destinations (together called opportunities) (aka accessibility)
Key-words: Opportunity: A chance for employment, leisure, etc Impedance: Difficulty of getting there Utility: Satisfaction experienced
Indicator of success The ability to reach destinations
ACCESSIBILITY
"Just as automobiles are machines that provide mobility, urban environments - villages, towns and cities - can be thought of as machines that provide accessibility by minimizing the distance among people and their desired goods, service and activities
(shops, schools, jobs, neighbors, etc.).“ [Litman, 2010]
A PARADIGM SHIFT IS NEEDED
“Travel is a derived demand”, i.e. the demand for travel is derived from the demand for spatially-separated activities:
1. Behaviour and choices of people and companies.
2. Locations and type of spatially bound activities, such as residing, working, recreation.
3. Resistance to overcome a distance (impedance), in terms of time, costs and other factors, such as safety & security, comfort etc.
CONCEPTUALIZING ACCESSIBILITY
Point of Origin
Point of destination
(Utility/Benefit)
Transport network
(Impedance)
CONCEPTUALIZING ACCESSIBILITY
our focus
• Contour measures (cumulative opportunity) – measures the cumulative number of (job) opportunities that can be reached in a given time or at certain threshold distance from a specified origin.
• Potential measures (activity based) – discounts the number of (job) opportunities that can be reached from a specified origin.
MEASURING ACCESSIBILITY
Indicator for the effectiveness of the transport system ability to reach employment areas, service locations, centre
areas etc.
Indicator for the availability of services securing a geographical match between resource allocation
and resource needs
ACCESSIBILITY MEASURES – CONT’D
CASE STUDY AHMEDABAD, INDIA
• Ahmedabad is the largest city of Gujarat state on the banks of Sabarmati river and the seventh largest city in India [total area = 190 km2].
• Current population Ahmedabad city is about 5.5 million. • In 1994 many mills faced liquidation and were officially closed
leaving nearly 67,000 of workers jobless.• The percentage of people living in low-income housing is about
40% (25% in slums, 15% in industry estates (chawls))• Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM),
2005: • urban poor housing relocation scheme • Introduction of Bus Rapid Transit (BRTS) as well as Metro
system (MRT) • What are accessibility effects of the (proposed) relocation
and public transport upgrading schemes for the urban poor?
AHMEDABAD
Conceptual framework
CASE STUDY AHMEDABAD
Urban poor
Physical condition
of housing
-Income
-Education level
Transport
-Modes-Networks-Operation
Employment
-Job type
-Location of jobs
DATA
Analysis activity Key data sources Data source to test model assumptions
Data source for model validation
Determining locations of the urban poor
Locations of slums and chawls (remote sensing)
Expert interviews
Determining locations of employment
Ahmedabad property tax data
Expert interviews
GIS based network modelling
Various networks, AMTS and BRTS with their characteristicsMode use of urban poor
n.a. n.a.
Contour based accessibility modelling
BSUP housing locations Focus Group discussions
Gravity based accessibility modelling
Ahmedabad household surveyDistance decay curves
Focus Group discussions
Current and proposed public transport modes 3D – ArcGIS mutli-modal network model, allowing for transfers
INTEGRATED MULTI-MODAL TRANSPORT NETWORK
NETWORK SETTINGS
LOCATIONS OF THE URBAN POOR AND THEIR JOBS
Remote sensing data to capture housing types Classify level of poverty (least poor, middle poor, very poor) Slums and chawls combined, Worker Density per 0.25ha
DENSITY OF POTENTIAL WORKERS
±
Legend
slum location
riverdensity potential workers
[per .25 hect.]7. - 1010. - 2525. - 9090. - 400400. - 1,970 0 2.5 5
Km
Formal employment - all job sectors combined, 400 x 400m. Grid:
LOCATIONS OF EMPLOYMENT
Job sectors, partly as proxies for informal employment:• Industrial• Retail• Government• Education• Transport and logistics• Office and commercial jobs• All jobs combined (shown here)
Categorized as:• Casual labour jobs• Salaried jobs• Self employment jobs
± 0 2.5 5Km
Legend
Employment [ jobs]
1 - 100
100 - 250
250 - 500
500 - 1000
1000 - 3000
roads
river /lake
Connecting workers and potential jobs (expert knowledge – Ray (2010) and focus groups)
LINKING POOR WORKERS AND JOBS
Urban poor
Least poorMiddle-poorVery poor
Employment
SalariedSelf employmentCasual labour
Transport network
DISTRIBUTION OF URBAN POOR CLASSES AND EMPLOYMENT CATEGORIES
JnNURM, Basic Services to Urban Poor (BSUP) program
Socially & Economically Weaker Section Housing (SEWSH) scheme
21 SEWSH locations 976 new buildings relocating 78,080 poor
Used as a scenario in this study
SOCIALLY & ECONOMICALLY WEAKER SECTION HOUSING (SEWSH)
S1: IMPACT OF SEWSH RELOCATION PROGRAMME
9
8
7
65
4
3
1
2120
19
18
17 16 15
141312
11
10
± 0 2.5 5Km
Legend
sewsh location
AMTS lines
roads
SEWSH
Contour [min]
0 - 10
10 - 20
20 - 30
30 - 45
45 - 60
river/lakeModes: Walking
AMTS
9
8
7
65
4
3
1
2120
19
18
17 16 15
141312
11
10
± 0 2.5 5Km
Legend
sewsh location
AMTS lines
BRTS lines
MRTS metro
roads
Contour [min]
0 - 10
10 - 20
20 - 30
30 - 45
45 - 60
river/lake
Modes: WalkingAMTS
BRTS phase 1&2Metro
pointid Name1 Shahwadi2 Vatava3 Vatva Site A & Site B4 Calico Mill5 Ahmedabad Cotton Mill, Sarangpur6 Kesar Hind Mill Ni Chali7 Rustam Mill8 Vivekanand Mil9 Raipur Mill
10 Saraspur Mill11 Vijay Mill12 Odhav-1, 18713 Odhav-3, 2314 Odhav-3, 3715 Odhav-3, 3816 Odhav -3, 5117 Odhav - 3, 8618 Vadaj BSUP19 Ajit Mill, Rakhiyal20 Ishanpur21 Bag-e-Firdosh
Without BRTS/MRTS With BRTS/MRTS
Bars: walking (left), walking + AMTS (middle) and all modes (right)
IMPACT OF SEWSH RELOCATION PROGRAMME
0
200000
400000
600000
800000
1000000
1200000
1400000
1600000
45-60
30-45
20-30
10-20
0-10
SEWSH Id.
Tota
l jo
b o
pp
ort
un
itie
s
9
8
7
65
4
3
1
2120
19
18
17 16 15
141312
11
10
± 0 2.5 5Km
Legend
sewsh location
AMTS lines
BRTS lines
MRTS metro
roads
Contour [min]
0 - 10
10 - 20
20 - 30
30 - 45
45 - 60
river/lake
Mode: WalkingAMTS
BRTS phase 1&2Metro
pointid Name1 Shahwadi2 Vatava3 Vatva Site A & Site B4 Calico Mill5 Ahmedabad Cotton Mill, Sarangpur6 Kesar Hind Mill Ni Chali7 Rustam Mill8 Vivekanand Mil9 Raipur Mill
10 Saraspur Mill11 Vijay Mill12 Odhav-1, 18713 Odhav-3, 2314 Odhav-3, 3715 Odhav-3, 3816 Odhav -3, 5117 Odhav - 3, 8618 Vadaj BSUP19 Ajit Mill, Rakhiyal20 Ishanpur21 Bag-e-Firdosh
IMPACT OF SEWSH RELOCATION PROGRAMME
Specifically looking at locations 1, 13, 14, 15, 16
&-
&-
&-
&-
&-
#*
= +/- 1 km usingthe roads
16
15
14
13
&-
&-
#*#*#*#*#*
#*
#*#*#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*#*
#*4
1
0 250 500Meters
&-
&-
&-&-&-&-17
16 15
1413
12
0 1 2Km
&-
&-
&- &-
&-
&-
65
4
1
20
10
0 1 2Km
0 1 2Km
Legend
AMTS stops
#* BRTS stops
&- SEWSH location
AMTS lines
BRTS lines
roads
employment
Clearly the housing relocation project (versus BRTS/MRTS) has more losers than winners
IMPACT OF RELOCATION ON JOB ACCESSIBILITY
0-30 min walking walking + AMTS all modesBefore relocation 78,000 jobs 148,000 jobs 215,000 jobs
After relocation 40,000 jobs 61,000 jobs 80,000 jobsWinners 4 locations
(5, 6, 10, 11)3 locations(5 ,6 , 10)
3 locations(5, 6, 10)
Losers 17 locations(1-4, 7-9, 12-21)
18 locations(1-4, 7-9, 11-21)
18 locations(1-4, 7-9, 11-21)
30-60 min Walking walking + AMTS all modesBefore relocation 353,000 jobs 798,000 jobs 910,000 jobs
After relocation 155,000 jobs 545,000 jobs 637,000 jobsWinners 6 locations
(5-10)7 locations(5-11)
9 locations(5 – 11, 19, 20)
Losers 15 locations(1-4, 11-21)
14 locations(1-4, 12-21)
12 locations(1-4, 12-18)
The potential of opportunities for interaction
with Wj the number of jobs in location j, cij the generalized cost of travelling between i and j, and f(cij) the distance decay function
Distance decay functions (two modes):
CALCULATING POTENTIAL JOB OPPORTUNITIES
)exp()( j
ijjj
ijji cWcfWA
CALCULATING POTENTIAL JOB OPPORTUNITIES City-wide Potential accessibility analysis (least poor to salaried jobs)
CITY-WIDE POTENTIAL ACCESSIBILITY ANALYSIS
Ratio of job-based potential accessibility for all potential workers comparing all public transport options with walking and AMTS only.
Impact mostly linear, and in close vicinity of the proposed systems.
Relative to walking/AMTS alone
EFFECT OF BICYCLE FEEDERS (ALL POOR)
Overall the level of potential accessibility for the locations improves by 135% on average for the 21 SEWSH locations
_̂
_̂
_̂
_̂
_̂
_̂
_̂
_̂
_̂
_̂
_̂
_̂
_̂
_̂
_̂
_̂
_̂_̂ _̂
_̂
_̂ _̂ _̂_̂
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
#*#*#*#*#*#*
#*#*
#*#*
#*#*
#*
#*
#* #* #*#*
#*#*#* #* #*
#*#* #*
#*
#*
#* #* #* #* #* #* #* #* #*
#*#*#*#* #*
#*#*#* #*
#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
#*
#* #* #*#*
#*#*
#*#*#*#*#*#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*#*#*#*
#*
#*
#*#*
#*#*
#*#*#*
#*#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*#*#*
#*#*#*
#*#*#*#*
#*
#*")9 ")8
")7
")6")5
")4
")3 ")2
")1")21")20
")19
")18
")17 ")16 ")15 ")14
")13")12
")11
")10
±Legend
SEWSH potential jobs
200,000
cycling contribution
walk + PT
#* BRTS stops
_̂ MRTS stations
BRTS buslines
MRTS lines
roads
river / lake
0 2.5 5Km
OVERALL PUBLIC TRANSPORT IMPACT
Walk
+ AM
TS
+ BRTS 1
+ BRTS 2
+ MRT
0
5,000,000
10,000,000
15,000,000
20,000,000
25,000,000
SEWSH
Least poor
Middle poor
Very poor
SEWSH
Least poor
Middle poor
Very poor
0%5%
10%1
5%
8%
4%
13%
8%
14%
9%
+ BRTS 1 + BRTS 2 + MRT
Inc
rea
se
in p
ote
nti
al a
cc
es
sib
ility
re
lati
ve
to
wa
lkin
g a
nd
AM
TS
The very poor workers benefit least
CONCLUSIONS
There is variation between accessibility to jobs for different urban poor groups.
Compared to walking, the existing and proposed public transport improvements do improve job accessibility considerably.
BRTS/MRTS impact is mainly in the vicinity of the systems. Cycling provides a good first/last-mile access to and from the
proposed BRTS/MRTS, combining the strengths of both NMT/PT.
The housing relocation scheme clearly hasn’t
considered transport and promotes exclusion These effects are likely to be exacerbated when including
affordability.
PROJECT TEAM: CASE STUDY AHMEDABAD
The World Bank group Nupur Gupta, Andrew Salzberg and Samuel Zimmerman
University of Twente – Faculty ITC Mark Zuidgeest (PI) (formerly), Mark Brussel and Martin van
Maarseveen Frans van den Bosch and Nguyen Ngoc Quang Talat Munshi (CEPT University, Ahmedabad)