Until a more virtuous cycle of positive experiences can be established, the potential of the paratransit sector to be accepted as a significant player in the urban mobility systems of Africa in the future remains doubtful, says Organisation Development Africa MD Nico McLachlan.

Paratransit, or community transport, such as that provided by minibus taxis, supplements fixed-route mass transit by providing individualised rides without fixed routes or timetables.

He lamented during this year’s virtual South African Transport Conference on July 6 that the sector is “generally seen as a major contributor to negative externalities such as congestion, fatal accidents and emissions”.

In spite of this, he pointed out that the paratransit sector remains the dominant mode of transport in most cities of the developing world.

However, in order to break the commonly held negative views about the sector, McLachlan said the onus is on the drivers, conductors and support staff involved in the sector to “find ways of improving their value offer, behaviour and the image of the industry” and that they will “have to learn how to work with those in positions of authority”.

At the same time, he urged professionals and the decision-makers responsible for public transport planning, regulation and contracting to “adopt open minds” about the potential of the paratransit sector’s ability to reform and to assume its “rightful place” in the urban mobility systems of the future.

In South Africa, the impact of Covid-19 on travel demand and minibus revenues have re-trained the spotlight onto the industry, McLachlan said, though he believes the country “still needs to be convinced that the current discourse between government and the industry is correctly framed and that [South Africa] needs to continue exploring alternatives to the rather limiting operating-subsidy focus of the current engagements”.

In highlighting some of the building blocks for enabling partnerships between government and the paratransit sector, McLachlan said partnerships work “because of the notion of complementarity”, the exploration of which leads to the building of trust.

“It is, therefore, important to consider the roles and responsibilities government should assume in pursuing an enabling partnership with the minibus taxi industry of South Africa and, more generally, with the paratransit sector in Africa,” McLachlan told delegates.

As such, he suggested that government should start by providing the minibus taxi industry with supporting infrastructure.

“Like any transport operator, the minibus taxi industry and the passengers that it serves require a decent rank and interchange facilities that meet the safety, security and comfort requirements of the passenger, as well as the operator’s efficiency requirements,” he explained.

In addition to decent passenger facilities, McLachlan said the minibus taxi industry also requires depot and overnight staging facilities. He referred to the construction of elaborate depot and staging facilities for bus rapid transit (BRT) systems over the last decade, which today “serves a fraction of the demand” that the minibus taxi industry serves.

Further, he added that the “unstated policy position appears that government has no responsibility in respect of supporting infrastructure for the [public transport] mode that carries the bulk of users”.

In terms of regulating and contracting, McLachlan said government has “a principal responsibility” to regulate supply in the public transport arena and to set and apply barriers to entry.

“Chronic conditions of oversupply are neither in the interest of the passenger nor in the interest of the operator or the authorities,” he noted.

McLachlan further mentioned that South Africa has “one of the most advanced regulatory systems in the developing world”, yet the country appears “unable to maintain a proper balance between supply and demand”, and that its failure in this regard “feeds a doom loop of destructive and often violent competition”.

He stressed that “the time has come” for a new deal to be brokered between government and the minibus taxi industry – a deal in which the industry assumes co-responsibility for the regulation in growth in supply as well as the regulation of competition.

Additionally, under stable market conditions, McLachlan said government should encourage business improvement and formalisation processes and consider the contracting of compliant minibus taxi entities as a means of integrating the taxi industry into public transport improvement programmes.

Further, the cost of capital or the cost of recapitalisation or refleeting is the “single biggest factor” impacting on the sustainability of a well-run taxi operation, McLachlan commented, adding that, in a context where government wishes to see greater compliance, “participation of approaches to regulation and better service delivery from the taxi industry, government and its financing partners will have to consider their role in alleviating the pressure brought onto the industry by the current high cost of capital”.

The minibus taxi industry, like any other transport operator, should also be enabled to tap into the efficiency gains that can be derived from access to modern technology, McLachlan suggested.

“There are at least three areas in which government could guide and assist the industry when it comes to choices about and approaches to the acquisition of technology.”

These areas are cashless fare systems, fleet management systems and passenger information systems.

McLachlan explained that the introduction of technology in these three areas held "enormous potential” for the transformation of the industry, and he urged government to consider the appropriate roles it could play in this regard.

Government should also assist in providing access to meaningful elements of the value chain, he said, through which providing access to the public transport value chain in the past appear to either have yielded limited results or to have “been captured by the influential and connected few in the industry”.

He stressed that access to value chain opportunities should be driven in a ground-up, rather than top-down, manner and should start with aspects of the demand and supply model that both local government and the industry have control over.

“The provisioning of facilities management services at major public transport facilities comes to mind as one such opportunity and, with the inevitable shift to cashless systems, the monetisation of data presents another meaningful and worthwhile element of value chain exploration,” he elaborated.

McLachlan also said “government has a duty to build the capacity of the minibus taxi industry”. In this regard, he highlighted three focus areas, namely the building of operations management capacity, general management capacity and the building of good governance.

“In the spirit of partnership formation, it is also important to consider the new roles and responsibilities the minibus taxi industry should assume,” he commented.

Overall, however, McLachlan said the industry would “have to face up to” the need for a willingness to change dated and inhibiting practices, a new approach to barriers to entry including breaking with elements of the political economy of the industry that feed oversupply, a breaking with patronage systems that benefit only a few.

“At a time when government is sending strong signals about breaking the systems of corruption, the minibus taxi industry should follow suit, and break the vicious cycle of jockeying for position, only to secure a place at the feeding truffe,” he commented.

The industry will also need to explore the benefits of scale and corporatisation, McLachlan concluded.