Effectiveness of Transjakarta Bus in Tackling Traffic in Jakarta:

Case Study of Total Transjakarta User Analysis

Ulfah Fajarini and Ruqoyah Fitria Annisaa

Faculty of Tarbiya and Teaching Sciences, Social Science Education Department, Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic

University Jakarta, Indonesia

Keywords: Effectiveness Transjakarta, Tackling, Congestion

Abstract: The purpose of this research is to know the effectiveness of Transjakarta bus in tackling traffic jam in

Jakarta. The research method used survey method with quantitative approach and calculation Manual of

Indonesia Road Capacity. The result of the research on the number of Transjakarta users has not been

effective and the congestion still occurs in the area around the stop until it reaches 7x from the normal limit

of travel, that is 0.6 and this proves that the existing theory of push and pull theory can not significantly

influence the switching of private vehicles to the Transjakarta bus. The survey results on Transjakarta user

respondents, at several Transjakarta bus stops in South Jakarta, West Jakarta, North Jakarta, East Jakarta,

Central Jakarta. indicate that Transjakarta bus has not been effective in overcoming traffic congestion in

Jakarta. However, other indicators indicated the success of Transjakarta. Most of the respondents stated

good. such as 1) smooth, fast, 2) safe or secure, 3) has a high enough capacity, 4) regularity in transportation

services, low cost, convenient, 5) Fast passengers up and down process 6) Efficient ticket payment process,

(7) Effective and transparent bus operator arrangement process, especially in North Jakarta: (8) Clean and

comfortable fleet and stop (9) Superior marketing techniques, (10) Excellent customer service.

1 INTRODUCTION

Considering the growth of public transportation

demand in controlling congestion in Jakarta to

regulate the transportation needs of society to be fair

on the highway, during the leadership of Governor

Sutiyoso on the second period (2002-2007) began to

initiated to develop mass transportation system

which integrated, both bus based (BRT = Bus Rapid

Transit) and train (MRT = Mass Rapid Transit). In

realizing as a mass transportation mode in Jakarta,

the development plan is then concluded in 2002

APBD. For 11 years, Transjakarta colored Jakarta

from the achievement that emerged until the

occurrence of several accidents. Mass transportation

that has become part of Jakarta is still delivered pros

and cons. The initial phase of the Transjakarta to

address congestion has a good objective as a

solution to address the growing number of people

and private vehicles. So the question is, whether

Transjakarta has become a solution to congestion?

The massive congestion in Jakarta has several

reasons that we can see directly, namely: The use of

private vehicle always increased from year to year

and this not only makes the increase in vehicle but

also exacerbate congestion in Jakarta. The bought of

private vehicle not only on car but also on

motorcycle that increasingly meet the streets of DKI

Jakarta. The increase of private vehicles is not

accompanied by the increase of roads in DKI

Jakarta.

2 LITERATURE REVIEW

According to Nelson, Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) in

the United States is relatively recent. BRT has many

promises, one of which is enhancing the economic

development prospects of firms locating along the

route. Another is to improve overall metropolitan

economic performance. They evaluate this issue

with respect to one of the nation’s newest BRT

systems that operates in a metropolitan area without

rail transit: Eugene-Spring field, Oregon. While the

metropolitan area lost jobs between 2014 and 2010,

jobs grew within 0.25 miles of BRT stations. Using

shift-share analysis, we find that BRT stations are

attractive to jobs in several economic sectors.

596

Fajarini, U. and Annisaa, R.

Effectiveness of Transjakarta Bus in Tackling Trafﬁc in Jakarta: Case Study of Total Transjakarta User Analysis.

DOI: 10.5220/0009024400002297

In Proceedings of the Borneo International Conference on Education and Social Sciences (BICESS 2018), pages 596-601

ISBN: 978-989-758-470-1

Planning and policy implication are offered along

with an outline for future research (Nelson, Arthur

C., et al. 2013 : 41-57).

Public transport is all means of transportation

Where passengers do not using their own vehicles.

Whether private cars or private motorcycles. The

definition of public transportation is any motor

vehicle that is provided for use by public with a fee

charged either directly or indirectly. Public

transportation is an alternative transportation within

the city, especially for people who do not have

private vehicle, so the need for these facilities and

infrastructure is needed an urban areas.

As rural public transit systems are vital to the

livelihood of rural americans, improving the

operations of these systems is the focus of this work.

The use of performance measures to evaluate

operation is essential to maintain growth and avoid

becoming stagnant. The main goal of this study was

to examine existing performance measures (PM) and

modify them to allow for comparison of

performance among rural transit agencies in

Alabama. The tasks presented in this paper are a

review of performance measures, data collection,

and data analysis for agencies in Alabama. The

report concludes that performance measures can be

developed that balance external factors in the

analysis and allow for a fair comparison of agencies

(Anderson, Michael & Khan, Tahmina. 2014: 1-13).

The objective of this paper belongs to Hou,

Yueying, et al is to analyze service reliability of bus

rapid transit (BRT) taking Changzhou BRT as an

example. Headway irregularity, potential waiting

time, and reliability buffer time are recomemended

to measure service reliability of BRT. Temporal and

spatial distributions and comparisons are analyzed.

Findings are that passengers of Changzhou BRT

need to budget, on average, an extra 3-5 minutes

beyond their typical journey time for selected origin-

destination pairs to ensure on-time arrival at

destination with 95% probability. Extra time

budgeted for bus waiting beyond mean waiting time

contributes to more than 80 percent of extra time

budgeted for a journey, while only 20 percent is

budgeted for in-vehicle travel time. Service

reliability is best near a route’s origin terminal and

gradually deteriorates along the route, then improves

when approaching the route’s end (Hou, Yueying, et

al. 2014: 113-133).

Public Transport plays an important role in a

city’s economy and its social equity. It is also

instrumental in reducing automobile dependence and

traffic congestion. Several factors must come

together to achieve well-functioning public transport

systems. One major factor is the level of

accessibility offered by the public transport system.

To better understand and consequentially enhance

accessibility, We must be able to measure it and map

it, which is the key aim of this paper (Shah, Jay S &

Adhvaryu, Bhargav. 2016: 19-35).

This paper belongs to Foell, Stefan, et al. Present

an analysis of regularity in public transport usage

based on a large-scale bus transportation data of

Lisbon, Portugal. By exploring the combined

information from the bus boarding history of riders

and bus arrivals at each bus stop, an analysis of

individual bus usage was perfomed. Daily an weekly

patterns were extracted, from which it was observed

that a rider takes, on average, 2 trips, visits 1.93

distinct stops, and uses 1.55 distinct bus lines daily.

Inter-trip time analysis revealed a daily cycle, and a

study of the interaction between riders and bus

infrastructure explored how usage was concentrated

on particular bus lines and stops (Foell, Stefan, et al.

2016:161-177).

The aim of Nwachukwu study was to investigate

passenger satisfaction with the service quality

attributes of public bus transport services in Abuja,

Nigeria. To achieve this, a survey was conducted

between February and July 2011. In 10 sample bus

stop areas selected for this study, 300 public bus

transport users were randomly selected to elicit their

overall satisfaction and factors that influenced their

satisfaction in the use of public bus transport

services in Abuja using a self-rated questionnaire.

Data obtained were analyzed using descriptive

statistics, correlation, and principal component and

regression analyses. The result of these analyses

showed that passenger were not satisfied with the

public bus transport services in Abuja. Using

principal Component Analysis (PCA), Four

underlying factors were extracted that influenced

passenger satisfaction with public bus transport

services in the city. The four components together

explained 83.87 percent of the cumulative variance

of PCA, Leaving 16.32 percent of the total varience

unexplained. The standardized regression

coefficients further showed that comfort has the

greatest impact on overall satisfaction, followed by

accsesbility. Adequacy and bus stop facilities were

the third and fourth factors in the order of relative

importance in influencing passenger satisfaction of

public bus transport services in the city. On the basis

of the findings, recommendations were made to

improve public bus transport services in the city of

Abuja (Nwachukwu, Ali A. 2014: 99-119).

According to Brechan, a random effects meta-

analysis of the results from 15 projects involving

Effectiveness of Transjakarta Bus in Tackling Trafﬁc in Jakarta: Case Study of Total Transjakarta User Analysis

597

price reduction and 9 projects involving increased

services frequency showed that both price reduction

and increased services frequency generated public

transport travels. On average, The increased services

frequency projects generated more travels by public

transport than the price reduction projects. In the

increased service frequency projects the proportion

of travels generated by the increased frequency was

strongly influenced by the size of the frequency

increase. In the price reduction projects, we did not

find a significant effect of the size of the price

reduction on the proportion of travels generated by

the price reduction. Finding that people’s use of

public transport was related to the extent of the

service offered suggest they have a need for

transport that can be fulfilled with public transport.

Although people appreciate lower fares in general,

finding that use of public transport was not

significantly related to the size of a price change

suggests the effect of price change is uncertain

(Brechan, Inge. 2017:139-156).

This paper belongs to Shiftan, Yoram, et al.

incorporates insights from relevan consumer

behavior research in marketing to travel mode

choice by adopting the loyalty model, a decision-

making model, to better understand and evaluate

passenger attitudes toward public transport modes.

This paper describes the loyalty model and

demonstrates and validates its use in transportation

using a case study of a choice between two modes,

rail and bus. Based on factors analysis, two factors

from the loyalty model were indentified : loyalty,

which measures the repeat purchase of the services

and the passenger’s attitude toward it; and hedonic

commitment, which measures the emotional feeling

after using a mode. The full loyalty model was

validated for both rail and bus passengers. The

research shows that, like other consuming products

toward which subjective emotional feeling affects

the consumer’s behavior, passenger choice is

significantly affected by subjective emotional

feelings toward the mode. Additionaly, the

subjective effect can be measured easily using

marketing research techniques (Shiftan, Yoram, et

al. 2015:1-16).

2.1 Jakarta Transportation

The road network in DKI Jakarta Province from

2009 to 2012 has increased approximately 1-6% per

year. Increased road length only occurred on

provincial road. The total length of provincial roads

for 2012 is 7094 km equals to 2011 while 2010

reached 6743 and 2011 reached 6409 kilometers.

For road transport infrastructure, the number of

terminals in DKI Jakarta Province in 2013 is 11

locations with details for Type A terminals of 5

locations, Type B terminals of 6 locations, and no

Type C terminal. Motor Vehicle Testing Unit is

located in 6 locations with a total of 213 testers and

a total of 13 types of mechanical testing equipment

and 2 non mechanical equipment. While there are

3861 units of public transportation which are shaded

by 67 POs, there are 91082 units of AKDP, and

there are 5423 transport tourism by 120 POs in

2013. For road transportation, the number of motor

vehicles in DKI Jakarta has increased each mode of

transportation with a total percentage increase of

10% where the largest number of motorcycle modes

with percentage increase of 13%.

2.2 Transjakarta Passengers

Passenger is a person who is in a vehicle other than a

driver and the crew of the vehicle. Transjakarta

passenger on January 15 – 31, 2014 are free of

charge. This is done as a promotion to Transjakarta

Busway existence. Transjakarta passenger growth.

The plan to make the campaign free in the first two

weeks was not in vain. The increase after the

promotion remain very high. At the beginning, on

each month, Transjakarta increased more than

60.000 passengers and the density of passenger

occurred on weekdays of 54.000 people, while on

weekends, holiday and public holiday is 39.000

people.

2.3 Congestion

According to research from Japan International

Corporation Agency (JICA), if the direction of urban

development and transportation system is not

immediately solved with the serious action, it is

predicted that by the end of 2014, Jakarta's

transportation system will be in a permanent

gridlock.

The handling measures according to Sutomo

(2001) et al. consists of several efforts; including the

addition of road network, the implementation of

congestion management, the determination of

transportation policies and mass transportation.

3 RESEARCH METHOD

This research uses descriptive quantitative research

method with survey technique for congestion data of

DKI Jakarta Province. Survey conducted by

BICESS 2018 - Borneo International Conference On Education And Social

598

researchers based on directives from the Directorate

of Traffic section of GATUR (Security and

Arrangement). The data collected is divided into

two, namely; primary and secondary data. The

research form are observation and in-depth

interviews conducted in South Jakarta area, precisely

along with the road of Corridor VI (Six) of

Transjakarta, from Ragunan to Dukuh Atas. The

distribution of questionnaires to respondents

regarding the success indicators of Transjakarta is

conducted in 12 bus stops in North Jakarta, Central

Jakarta, West Jakarta, South Jakarta and East

Jakarta. The study was conducted from April to

October 2016.

4 RESEARCH RESULT AND

DISCUSSION

4.1 Push and Pull Analysis

This analysis is by looking at Transjakarta trip that

has been counted 11 years about the benefit and

growth of Transjakarta users through scale per year.

The growth of Transjakarta passengers shows an

increase level every year (BPS with processed data.

2014). The increase of Transjakarta passenger since

2004 to 2005 shows the number of 39.4% and

continually increase until 2011. As a significant

increase occurred when the corridor of the busway

was added as in 2006 to III corridor, 2007 became

VII corridor, 2010 becomes X corridor, and 2013

becomes XII corridor. On 2015 when it was still

under construction for XV corridors and corridors

built using overpasses, but the number decreased by

the year 2012.

This increase indicates the increasing travel

needs of Jakarta residents from the beginning of

Transjakarta's development with free tickets until

Transjakarta has been 11 years with tickets that have

not experienced price increases. Transjakarta empty

stool is now occupied and counted the survey of

YLKI on 2012, showed that 11.8% of private car

users switch to Transjakarta, so that in

TransJakarta's busy hours crowded with passengers.

4.2 The Effectiveness of Transjakarta

In tackling the congestion required the quantity of

Transjakarta passengers who can be transported

maximally in reducing the space of vehicles on the

roads on capital, jammed into difficult to walk

because road filled with vehicles.

Before being said which is effective or

ineffective can be chosen, the influence generated by

Transjakarta as primadonna transportation in DKI

Jakarta shows the comparison of Trasjakarta

passenger is 29% private car, motorcycle 54%, bus

13% and transjakarta 4%.

Transjakarta passenger in the calculation of a

week during peak hours have not dominated the area

around the Deptan (Department of Agriculture)

shelter. Its dominated by motorcycle first, and

private cars on second place. At Mampang bus stop,

Transjakarta passenger during peak hours and other

vehicle users conducted during the week are; 27%

cars, 57% motorcycles, 14% buses, 2% Transjakarta.

This data shows that more than 50% of vehicle

around the Mampang shelter are motorcycles. The

percentage on Transjakarta is still small and far form

targert compared to the others. Further comparison

of vehicle users with Transjakarta passenger at GOR

(Sports Arena) shelters is; car 49%, motorcycle

38%, bus 10%, Transjakarta 3%.

Based on data. Shows the car dominates about

50% of other vehicles, the second place filed by

motorcycles, then buses and the last place is

Transjakarta. The data above then take the overall

comparison between vehicle users with Transjakarta

passengers and the effectiveness of Transjakarta in

tackling congestion; 70% motorcycles, 26% cars,

1% bus, 3% Transjakarta. This data indicates that

Transjakarta's carrying capacity in attracting

passengers to switch to Transjakarta has not

dominated yet. Road users, still choosing private

vehicles rather than public transport. Capital city

citizen does have many activities so it requires a

private vehicle to meet the needs of mobilization.

Based on the calculation of effectiveness, it can

be concluded that the number of Transjakarta

passengers has not been effective, this is an evident

from the simple statistical methods by Institution of

Research and Development, Ministry of Internal

Affairs year (Litbang Depdagri), 1991. Based on the

data, the reaseracher known effectiveness of

Transjakarta accounted for 40%.

Based on the Transjakarta Success Indicator

data, respondents in one corridor in North Jakarta,

Central Jakarta, West Jakarta, South Jakarta and East

Jakarta are said as follows: (1) speed (smooth or

fast), North Jakarta: 50%, Jakarta Central: 66.7%,

South Jakarta: 66.7%, East Jakarta: 58.3%, unless

West Jakarta passenger stated: 58.3% not smooth.

(2) safety (safe or secure), North Jakarta: 83.3%,

Central Jakarta: 83.3%, West Jakarta: 91.7%, South

Jakarta: 75%, East Jakarta: 83.3%, (3 ) Capacity

(Transjakarta has bigger capacity) North Jakarta:

Effectiveness of Transjakarta Bus in Tackling Trafﬁc in Jakarta: Case Study of Total Transjakarta User Analysis

599

66.67% say no, Central Jakarta: 66.67%, South

Jakarta: 50%, East Jakarta: 75%, unless 58.3% West

Jakarta passenger stated no capacity (4) frequency

(number of times transport service is done within

certain time, e.g: weekly and month), North Jakarta:

50%, Central Jakarta: 58.3%, West Jakarta: 66.7%,

South Jakarta : 50%, East Jakarta: 58.3%, (5)

regularity (regularity in transport services), North

Jakarta: 66.67%, Central Jakarta: 83.3%, West

Jakarta: 58.3%, South Jakarta: 66.67%, East Jakarta:

75%, (6) comprehensive (transportation services

implemented comprehensively from place of origin

to destination), North Jakarta: 83.3%, Central

Jakarta: 100%, West Jakarta: 75%, South Jakarta

83.3%, East Jakarta: 83.3%, (7) responsibility

(responsible for loss or damage) North Jakarta:

58.3%, Central Jakarta: 60%, unless 75% West

Jakarta passenger stated no responsibility , Central

Jakarta: 100% stated no responsibility, East Jakarta:

83.3% stated no responsibility, (8) acceptable cost

(low cost) or affordable price, North Jakarta: 100%,

Central Jakarta: 100%, West Jakarta: 100%, South

Jakarta: 91.7%, East Jakarta: 100%, and (9) comfort

or convenience; North Jakarta: 66.7%, Central

Jakarta: 83.3%, West Jakarta: 75%, South Jakarta:

75%, East Jakarta: 83.3%, (10) Exclusive Special

Lane (Segregated Busways) respondents stated no.

North Jakarta: 66.7%, no exclusivity. Central

Jakarta: 75%, no exclusivity. West Jakarta: 75%, no

exclusivity. South Jakarta: 58.3%, no exclusivity.

East Jakarta: 58.3%, no exclusivity. (11) Rapid

Boarding and Alighting process, North Jakarta:

83.3%, Central Jakarta: 66.6%, West Jakarta: 58.3%,

South Jakarta: 66.67%, East Jakarta : 58,3%, (12)

Efficient ticket payment process, North Jakarta:

100%, Central Jakarta: 75%, West Jakarta: 75%,

South Jakarta: 91.7%, East Jakarta: 100% (13)

Effective and transparent bus operators' regulation

process; North Jakarta: 75%, Central Jakarta: 58.3%,

West Jakarta: 58.3%, South Jakarta: 58.3%,

respondents stated no. East Jakarta: 66.7%, (14)

Real-time and informative information management

system, North Jakarta: 66.67%, Central Jakarta:

58.3%, West Jakarta: 66.7% stated not informartive.

South Jakarta: 50%, East Jakarta: 58.3%, (15)

Priority bus at intersection, North Jakarta: 50%,

Central Jakarta: 58.3% of respondents stated no,

West Jakarta: 58.3%, South Jakarta: 58.3% of

respondents stated no, East Jakarta: 83%, (16)

Integration of modes with other convenient and

convenient transportation at North Jakarta bus stop

and terminal: 75%, Central Jakarta: 66.7%, West

Jakarta : 66.7%, South Jakarta: 66.7%, East Jakarta:

66.7% (17) Condition of fleets and shelters; clean,

safe and comfortable; North Jakarta: 75%, Central

Jakarta: 75%, West Jakarta : 58.3%, South Jakarta:

58.3%, East Jakarta: 83.3%, (18) Superior marketing

technique, North Jakarta: 75%, Central Jakarta:

91.7%, West Jakarta: 58.3 %, South Jakarta: 66.7%,

East Jakarta: 58.3%, (19) Excellent customer

service, North Jakarta: 66.7%, Central Jakarta: 75%,

West Jakarta: 75%, South Jakarta: 58,3% of

respondents stated no, East Jakarta: 83.3%, (20)

Transjakarta pathways that have been sterilized from

other vehicles and most respondents said no. North

Jakarta: 58.3% no, Central Jakarta: 58% no, West

Jakarta: 66.7% no, South Jakarta: 83.3% no, East

Jakarta: 75% no, (21) Transjakarta bus has

effectively overcome congestion. Most of the

respondents stated that they are not in Jakarta. North

Jakarta: 83% no, Central Jakarta: 100% no, West

Jakarta: 91.7% no, South Jakarta: 75% no, East

Jakarta: 83% no.

From the above indicator, Transjakarta has not

achieved success and most of Transjakarta

passengers, revealed that Transjakarta has not

effectively overcome traffic jam in Jakarta.

5 CONCLUSIONS

Based on the result of the calculation of the

effectiveness of Transjakarta passengers has not

been effective, because there are still many road

users to choose private vehicles instead of public

transportation. This is also evidenced by the high

number of private riders and Transjakarta's carrying

capacity in attracting passengers to switch to

Transjakarta has not yet dominated.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors would like to express their gratitude to

the informants and Head of organizing Transjakarta.

who had given their time and energy to be

interviewed during the research authors conducted.

This work was fully supported by a grant from

LP2M UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta (Dana Hibah

Kementerian Agama RI- LP2M UIN Syarif

Hidayatullah Jakarta).

REFERENCES

Anderson, Michael & Khan, Tahmina. 2014.Perfomance

Measures for the Analysis of Rural Public Transit in

BICESS 2018 - Borneo International Conference On Education And Social

600

Alabama. Journal of Public Transportation, 17 (4) : 1-

13.

Brechan, Inge. 2017. Effect of Price Reduction and

Increased Service Frequency on Public Transport

Travel. Journal of public Transportation, 20 (1): 139-

156.

Ditjen Perhubungan Darat Tahun 2013.

Foell, Stefan, et al. 2016. Regularity of public Transport

Usage : A Case Study of Bus Rides in :Lisbon,

Portugal. Journal of public Transportation, 19(4): 161-

177.

Hou, Yueying, et al. 2014. Measuring bus service

Relibility : An Example of Bus Rapid Transit In

Changzhou. Jurnal of public Transportation, 17 (2) :

113-133.

M. N. Nasution, 1996. Manajemen Transportasi. Jakarta:

Ghalia Indonesia.

Nelson Arthur C., et al. 2013. Bus Rapid Transit and

Economic Development: Case Study of the Eugene-

Springfields BRT System. Journal of Public

Transportation, 16 (3): 41-57.

Nwachukwu, Ali A. 2014. Assessment of Passenger

Satisfation with Intra-City Public bus Transport

services in Abuja, Nigeria. Journal of public

Transportation, 17(1): 99-119.

Saksono, Darmaningtyas, Achmad Izzul Waro, 2012.

Manajemen Tranjakarta Busway,. Jakarta:Suara

Bebas.

Save M Dagun,Dkk, 2006. Busway Terobosan

Penanganan Transportasi Jakarta. Jakarta:Pustaka

Sinar Harapan.

Shah, Jay S & Adhvaryu, Bhargav. 2016. Public

Transport Accessibility Levels for Ahmedabad, India.

Journal of public Transportation, 19 (3): 19-35.

Shiftan, Yoram, et al. 2015. Measuring Passenger Loyalty

to Public Transport Modes. Journal of public

Trasnportation, 18 ( 1): 1-16.

http://bataviabusway.blogspot.com/2007/10/busway-

kurang-efektif.html

Effectiveness of Transjakarta Bus in Tackling Trafﬁc in Jakarta: Case Study of Total Transjakarta User Analysis

601