A Discussion on the Future of Dolmuş

In the above sections, the evolution of dolmuş has been presented together with challenges it creates in relation to publicly operated systems, such as buses and the metro. The analysis of this evolution brings about the question of “What will be the future of dolmuş?” Exponentially increasing private car usage is increasing the traffic densities in significant amounts every year. Recent researches show that there is a negative relationship between the quality of life and traffic densities. This phenomenon is not sustainable both because the limited road structure is insufficient for high car ownership rates and because creating a “private car based” urban space contradicts with public interest. According to a survey study, the higher the traffic density in an area the less the will of living for the residents in that particular neighborhood (Kılınçaslan, 2012, 57). On the other hand, the approaches of western countries, which have urban macroforms developed based on private car usage, are not applicable for the countries like Turkey, that is why rather than meeting the demand, managing the demand approach becomes more important (Kılınçaslan, 2012, 180). It is a fact that, privately operated dolmuş with their 2231 number of vehicles cannot be easily removed from Ankara transportation network in the short term. With its 29.7% share in total public transport trips and 17.0% share in total transportation network, dolmuş is currently a major component of transportation supply in Ankara (EGO, 2016).

The foresight of Tekeli et. al. (1976, 159), was that; if better transportation systems are developed in urban networks, dolmuş operators would not be willing to compete with these new modes and that finally would result in the replacement of the dolmuş operatins. Up to now, as is seen from the current situation, that type of development has not emerged. However, as indicated again in the same study by Tekeli et. al.

(1976, 159), the enforcements, which aim to remove dolmuş instantly is not realistic or not easy because of the mutualist relationship between dolmuş and urban needs.

Nevertheless, there is a fundamental difference between the attitudes of decision makers of transportation about dolmuş in Turkey. Two different positions can be identified regarding dolmuş;

a) One position would be to claim that dolmuş should be eliminated from the system because in reality dolmuş and other privately operated modes are not

86

actually public transport. As in the development of squatter settlements or informal sectors, dolmuş is a transportation solution of the migrants, which should end. Completely formalized and publicly operated transportation system is the key to create a sustainable transportation network. That is why it is not possible to enable dolmuş vehicles to operate in formalized urban environment.

b) The other position would be claim that dolmuş still has the dominance to affect transportation decision in cities. In addition, with its flexibility, its profit-maximizing efficient operations and its self-sustaining characteristics, it can be beneficial for existing transportation network. In other words, it could complete the deficiencies of conventional modes.

Many transportation planners advocate the idea that completely publicly operated transit systems are needed for an efficient public transport system. Actually, this proposition is partially true. According to Cervero (1998, 438-439), the Houston city council experience shows the need for a mixture of systems with these findings:

In 1995, Houston city council opened the marketplace to private jitneys, lifting restrictions on fares and services. (Besides meeting driver and vehicle fitness standards, the only restrictions are that jitneys cannot stop at METRO stops and vehicles can be no older than five years.) This has unleashed competition, something sorely needed in suburban markets. Seeing the handwriting on the wall, METRO decided to get a step up on jitney entrepreneurs by contracting out supplemental van-size services for an 8-kilometer stretch of the Westheimer Boulevard corridor.

In Turkish cities, it is obvious that there is an increasing trend on developing transportation options and giving focus on transportation related issues. Many cities introduced urban rail systems or bus lanes to meet the demand for mobility. That is why public authorities aim to remove dolmuş, which they consider to be a primitive, low capacity and old mode, from the urban networks. On the other hand, as explained in detail, dolmuş still has the certain characteristics that help its survival.

In other words, dolmuş provides a different, preferred option for users and has its own lobbying characteristics that make it difficult to negotiate for decision makers.

Otherwise, the existence of dolmuş in current networks is unexplainable. As Işık and

87

Pınarcıoğlu (2013, 35) stated for unauthorized developed housing areas, for dolmuş (which is also a spontaneously emerged informal transportation mode) an analysis that evaluates dolmuş within a permeable relationship with the formal modes is necessary. Dimitriou (1990, 350-351), indicated the lack of understanding of the approach of technical personnel to informal sectors with the following:

In many instances these activities are viewed by local governments as a blight on the city, an administrative nuisance and an unnecessary impediment to a "smooth traffic flow". Whereas in fact, they simply reflect the state of the urban economy; they would not exist if they were not necessary. There is a tendency among some economists, as well as officials, to treat the informal sector with contempt regarding its work as unnecessary, inefficient, unprofitable, undignified and even counterproductive...yet it manages to serve the urban poor by providing employment and training opportunities, using appropriate technologies and local resources, recycling material, producing affordable goods and services and distributing profits to those with the greatest need (Werlin, 1982). It is precisely for these reasons that it is so important for planners and engineers to understand and make provision for this type of activity. The economic life of the city may not be best served simply by providing traffic flow at the expense of a large (if un-vocal) section of the community.

Urban informal sector covers many different activities, namely vending, trades, paratransit modes etc. There are debates that in the 21^st Century, their formalization process should take place and local governments should have their policies regarding the formalization process for these types of activities. However, the removal of transportation related operations as other type of urban activities is not that straightforward, because transportation services are mutually related with each other and disposal of one transportation activity directly affects the other related transportation modes, even other related sectors. A similar conclusion may be arrived at for very different reasons, regarding the introduction of a technically superior urban transport system: for example, if it makes a large number of persons unemployed in an economy where unemployment is already very high, it can be called into question on development grounds (Dimitriou, 1990, 390).

88

Işık and Pınarcıoğlu (2013, 40) in their study on informal sectors indicated specific points for informally developed sectors which are;

a) Structure basis on the fellow countryman

b) Their direct relation with the land and resident market c) Unequal redistribution of the yields of the sector

d) Political relations which are emerging on the basis of unequal yields That conceptualization is quite important because especially the last two create the lobbying power of informal sectors. Normally, as in other planning studies, informal sector studies within a framework between formal and informal sectors are necessary for a successful intervention. However, the dynamic structure of cities makes it difficult to understand the real qualifications of the informal sector. Researches on urban planning, whether they are about transport or not, should focus on the different mechanism of the continuity of informal sectors. Dolmuş (like gecekondu) emerged and developed within an informal process. While gecekondu was providing a shelter, dolmuş was providing a sector, which encompasses both transportation opportunity and a job opportunity for these vulnerable groups. To consider dolmuş only as a problem and supporting the removal of it from the system would result with the loss of its potential in the solution of Turkey-specific transportation problems. The importance of a different policy approach is highlighted in the book of Dimitriou (1990, 361) with the following:

It was suggested earlier in this chapter that despite considerable local variations, there are recurring street problems common to many Third World cities. These problems are so complex and interrelated that it is difficult to influence them with conventional traffic management approaches. Clearly experimentation is necessary to lead to innovative solutions. A traffic engineer whose education and experience have led him to concentrate exclusively on improving the flow of vehicular traffic may find it retrogressive to encourage street traders by making provision for them. Nevertheless, such measures are necessary if any real progress is to be made.

At that point, as a common belief among transportation experts, Kılınçaslan (2012, 131/278) states that if main service frequency, convenience, reliability, safety,

89

comfort, accessibility and affordability are essential qualifications of a public transport system then dolmuş has many deficiencies as a transportation mode; but, she also adds that a sustainable transportation network proposal is possible without the removal of paratransit services with;

a) Paratransit systems which are the feeders of the conventional transport b) Demand responsive transport operations

c) Work-School Services for commuting activities

Currently dolmuş is not only the first type of feeder services especially on the sub-zones not served by the conventional public transport services, but also operating along main demand corridors, providing an alternative service to conventional modes. It is often competing with these conventional modes, but considering its high share in passenger trips, it clearly offers a service that appeals to passengers and meets a mobility need. That is why it is not easy to remove it from the network. The problem in here is the way of integration for that kind of informal transportation mode. The small entrepreneurship of dolmuş has a flexible structure, which eases its adaptability. The first comprehensive study (Tekeli & Okyay, 1981) in the literature on dolmuş shows that the main reasons, which explain the preference of dolmuş, are due to higher operating speeds and flexible getting on-off opportunity when compared with bus operations. Furthermore, passengers complaints about the over-crowded and uncomfortable bus operations also shaped their choice of dolmuş when travelling (Tekeli & Okyay, 1981, 163). Even in that research dated late 1970s, the foresight of the authors was towards the existence of dolmuş in the future depending on the technological development and the reflections of this development on the efficiency of existing public transport networks in Turkey. With the ongoing operations of dolmuş today, this foresight is tested and it is seen that, in many cities but especially in Ankara, public transport services are far from being efficient and reliable. Surely, from the 1940s to today dolmuş evolved, organized and partially lost its flexibility in significant manner. However, its competition with the conventional modes continues. Additionally, today, the Transportation Coordination Centers (UKOME), which is consisting of municipality officials, army officials, state officials and Chamber of Dolmuş and Minibus Operators, organizes transportation operations in urban areas (Resmi Gazete, 2014). Even if there were many decisions

90

taken by these centers, it would not be wrong to say that most of the decisions are not applicable to dolmuş itself. This policy making process of municipality, without an in-depth analysis of dolmuş, was made in the previous years for many times. That is why; it is not surprising that, most of the policies are ineffective on dolmuş. The legislation prepared by the İstanbul Municipality in 1963 is an appropriate example to these ineffective policies. According to the legislation, minibuses were enforced to take at most two students in each trip (İller ve Belediyeler Dergisi, 1963, 207). This did not materialize in practice. Similar to İstanbul, in Ankara too, departures of each dolmuş vehicle were determined as 15 minutes by the municipality in the 1970s (Tekeli & Okyay, 1981, 9). This was also never the case in practice. Those examples show the fact that, policies and projects, which do not familiarize themselves with the stakeholders’ needs and nature, and particularly the users’ requirements and preferences, are unable to propose realistics and effective solutions.

In short, there is a need for a systematic analysis of dolmuş in the existing situation, particularly in relation to other modes and with reference to users’ point of view and preference. As emphasized above, the survival of dolmuş is very much related with its ability to meet the demands of public transport users; and hence policies for the future of this mode cannot be formulated without an in-depth understanding of its role in the mobility and accessibility of its users. To provide a better understanding on this issue, the next chapters explore the role of dolmuş in Ankara by focusing on a particular university campus area within the city and by analyzing the travel patterns and preferences of students of this university.

91 CHAPTER 5

5. ANALYSIS OF DOLMUŞ USAGE IN ANKARA: A SURVEY ON