LRT and street tram policies and implementation in turkish cities
Introduction
From 2000 onwards, Turkey started to invest in railways (both urban and national rail networks) at an accelerating pace. The current development plans and policies by the government envisage further network extensions, increases in rail patronage, and the further development and modernisation of the railway sector (Turkish State Railways, 2013, Ministry of Development, 2013). The Turkish State Railways initiated the first high-speed rail construction program in 2004. The current length of lines in operation are 820 km with 1,105 km under construction and a target of 13,000 km of high-speed rail lines by 2023 (the 100th anniversary year of the Turkish Republic). The central government has initiated a privatisation process and accordingly has an economic restructuring program that aims at adopting Public-Private Partnership (PPP) schemes to the Turkish State Railways and developing a national (inter-urban) rail network. This new regulation is expected to bring more technology transfer and international competition to the whole of the railway sector in Turkey (Nash, 2011, Nash et al., 2013).
These developments in Turkey demonstrate a renaissance in railway policies - as elsewhere in some parts of the world (Loo and Comtois, 2015) - and, thus, for the first time since the early 1960s there is a revival of rail when the dominant transport policy was motorisation and highway expansion throughout the country. The government’s master development plans and policy papers explain the dominant railways policies and underline substantial investments up to 2023. There is also another underpinning technical policy that is leading to this railway renaissance in Turkey that is relevant to the scope of this paper: the Tenth National Development Plan for the period 2014-2018 has reduced the passenger demand requirements for the development of urban rail systems to the extent that the minimum directional and hourly number of passengers is now set as: 7,000 passengers for tramways; 10,000 passengers for LRT (Light Rail Transit); and 15,000 passengers for metro.1
The obvious question to ask is what is the geographical and political impact of this LRT renaissance on the urban development of Turkish cities? We would expect that LRT and street tram networks initially to be implemented in the most populous cities. In the eleven cities with urban rail systems currently in operation (out of a total of eighty one Turkish cities) the total length of lines added from 2000 was 333 km. As might be expected, the major urban rail improvements were in Istanbul, where a total of 111.5 km of metro (including the Euro-Asian Bosporus Strait rail tunnel), LRT and tramway lines have been opened (Alpkokin et al., in press). Our methodology is to undertake a critical review of railway developments in these cities with particular reference to their background planning, financing and operational issues with an aim of assessing the strength of this renaissance and what might be done to support urban light rail policy in the future.
LRT and tramways have cost advantages for construction of underground metro systems and provide higher capacity and better environmental congestion mitigation impacts compared to buses, according to Knowles (1992). However, there are also cases where LRT and tramway plans have been shelved mainly for financing reasons (Knowles, 2007). These are generic issues of implementation worldwide because since the mid-1990s many countries have attempted to build or rebuild their urban railway networks and LRT systems. Many success stories can be found in the literature (Bottoms, 2003, Mandri-Perrot and Menzies, 2010, Olesen, 2014). Nevertheless, there are cases where planning targets were not achieved as anticipated (for example, see Shaw et al., 2003 for UK; Lane, 2008 for the USA; Topp, 1998 for Germany). There remain planning, investment (financing) and operational problems that need to be overcome in the shorter term in many countries.
We critically assess data extracted from the master plans for urban transport, we collect statistics through visits to the municipal divisions in charge of the operation of the railways in Turkish cities, and we conduct interviews with the urban planners, transport planners and elected officials from eight municipalities. The paper deliberately limits its scope to analyses of eight relatively smaller cities in Turkey - in contrast to the three major cities of Istanbul, Ankara and Izmir - because we have identified a gap in the Turkish transport literature on such smaller cities. These eight cities are not well known outside of Turkey and have not been subject to any academic transport research. All these eight cities (Adana, Antalya, Bursa, Eskisehir, Gaziantep, Kayseri, Konya and Samsun) operate LRT or tramway lines and seven of them developed their first rail line in the 2000s.
The paper is structured into eight sections as follows. The second and third sections describe the research framework and provide the background urban and railway statistics of eleven Turkish cities with urban rail systems in operation. The next two sections present a critical review of railway developments in eight smaller cities with particular reference to their background planning, decision-making, financing and operational issues. The sixth section is essentially a political discussion on two selected case study cities. The seventh section analyses potential PPP applications. Finally, section eight concludes the findings with an extended discussion about the railway renaissance in Turkey and suggestions as to how best to maintain the impetus of urban rail development into the future.
Section snippets
Research framework
There is a large gap between urban transport planning practice and the briefs written by government bureaucrats for consultants in project development and evaluation, and what academics – adopting a critical perspective on events – are able to publish on the policy-making process. Successful politicians are those that can implement reform and deliver change often by promoting their own (or their electorate’s) favourite infrastructure project – the “directors of urban change” (Nas, 2005).
Turkish cities with urban rail systems
There are eighty one designated towns and cities in Turkey of which eleven have an urban rail public transport system in operation in 2015 (Fig. 1). All of the eleven cities are located either in the western part of the country or in the inner parts of the main Anatolian land mass. This spatial pattern of urban rail is typical of “core-periphery” relationships identified by development geographers.
Table 1 provides the basic population, economy and public transport statistics for these eleven
Why LRT/Tram lines in eight Turkish cities?
Before we attempt to answer the question of why LRT/tramlines have been applied in these eight cities, it is important to review briefly some global approaches and practices. Today, modern public transport systems have proven their value in a transport contribution to more sustainable cities. What matters now is a precise determination of different cities’ characteristics, their future projected developments and then choosing the most suitable transport investment based on analyses of
Planning, investment and operational performances
Fig. 2 illustrates the type of urban systems (LRT or tramway) and their timelines of operation for the eight cities. It demonstrates how urban rail investments have accelerated in the 2000s. Amongst the eight cities, Konya was the first city with LRT and tramline developments, followed by Bursa and Eskisehir. Konya has a very flat terrain and wider streets than many other Turkish cities so the construction of the tramlines has been relatively straightforward. The city has a simple street
Case study cities
Additional light can be shed on the planning, implementation and operation of LRT and tramways in Turkish cities by undertaking more detailed case studies. This section has selected one successful example - Bursa - and contrasted it with Adana which is not a very successful case of effective implementation. Further discussion and analyses are presented of these two cities to illustrate the more general issues that occur in the smaller Turkish cities (in comparison to Istanbul, Ankara and Izmir).
The future – public-private partnership financing?
For many countries in the Asian region, urban and regional infrastructure bottlenecks remain a major impediment to sustaining economic growth (ASEAN Secretariat, 2010, Min, 2014). In the region’s emerging economies, investment in infrastructure is essential for the development of the manufacturing and services sectors to enable countries such as Turkey to drive productivity and maintain long-term economic growth. Infrastructure development remains an expensive and complex undertaking, and the
Conclusions
Turkey is investing in railways (both urban and national rail networks) at an accelerating pace. The government’s master development plans and policy papers explain the dominant railway policies and the substantial investments for 2023: further network extensions; increases in rail patronage; and the further development and modernisation of the railway sector. The central government has initiated a privatisation process, and, accordingly, has formulated an economic re-structuring program that
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to note their special thanks to the Institute for Transport Policy Studies (Japan) for funding part of this research and for their critical and valuable comments on the policy discussions for urban rail development in Turkey. The authors are also grateful for the assistance by the municipal planners and governors from (in alphabetic order): Adana, Antalya, Bursa, Eskisehir, Gaziantep, Kayseri, Konya and Samsun. They thank the anonymous reviewers of an early draft that has
References (52)
- et al.
Decision-making for light rail
Transp. Res. A Policy Pract.
(2009) What future for light rail in the UK after Ten Year Transport Plan targets are scrapped?
Transp. Policy
(2007)Significant characteristics of the urban rail renaissance in the United States: A discriminant analysis
Transp. Res. A Policy Pract.
(2008)Framing light rail projects – Case studies from Bergen, Angers and Bern
Case Stud. Transp. Policy
(2014)- et al.
Assessing the potential for a 'railway renaissance' in Great Britain
Geoforum
(2003) - et al.
Historical analysis of economic, social and environmental impacts of the Europe-Asia crossings in Istanbul
Int. J. Sustain. Transp.
(2015) Master Plan on ASEAN Connectivity - One Vision, One Identity, One Community
(2010)National Public Private Partnership – Policy Framework
(2008)Infrastructure Financing
(2014)Urban rail systems: analysis of the factors behind success
Transp. Rev.
(2002)
Private Sector Investment in Roads: The Rhetoric and the Reality
Transport and Public Policy Planning
Sydney's Transport Problems, New South Wales Parliamentary Library Background Paper, 1987/4
Transport-land use issues, problems and policy implications: Sydney since the thirties
Continuing development in light rail transit in Western Europe –United Kingdom, France, Spain, Portugal and Italy
Government supports in public–private partnership contracts: Metro line 4 of the São Paulo subway system
J. Infrastruct. Syst.
Public-private sector partnership models in Turkey
PPP projects in transport: Evidence from light rail projects in Spain
Public Money Manag.
Rail and property developments in Hong Kong: Experienced and extensions
Urban Stud.
Alternative contractual arrangements for urban light rail systems: Lessons from two case studies
J. Constr. Eng. Manag.
Evaluating the Environment for Public-private Partnerships in Asia-Pacific The 2011 Infrascope - Findings and Methodology, Commissioned by ADB
Discussion Paper 2013-21
Cost overruns and demand shortfalls in urban rail and other infrastructure
Transp. Plan. Technol.
Underestimating costs in public works projects: Error or lie?
J. Am. Plan. Assoc.
How (in)accurate are demand forecasts in public works project? The case of transportation
J. Am. Plan. Assoc.
Bus or Light Rail: Making the Right Choice
Cited by (19)
International transfer of railway infrastructure through the intermediation of aid agencies
2023, Transportation Research Interdisciplinary PerspectivesSecond-hand renovated trams as a novel decision strategy for public transport investment
2021, Transport PolicyCitation Excerpt :Despite the required high public investment levels, many more cities are investing in tramway systems for public transportation regarding these figures. The average cost for the tramway infrastructure is changing between 20.0 and 23.5 M€/km (Vuchic, 2017; Alpkokin et al., 2016; Swanson and Smatlak, 2015; Guieri, 2019) where 20 M€/km in Africa, 22.5 M€/km in Europe, 23.5 M€/km in North America. Even though higher costs are required for ‘catenary-free systems', each tram vehicle's average cost is 2.5–3.5 M€ (Guerrieri, 2019).
Sustainable urban mobility in Istanbul: Challenges and prospects
2020, Case Studies on Transport PolicyCitation Excerpt :However, as the Director of Strategy Development Department notes, the opposition from the minibus associations and the public pressure delay the successful reorganization of the routes. Istanbul has a remarkable experience with this form of paratransit transport, which has been actively in use since 1950s (Alpkokin et al., 2016a). A control center for minibuses, dolmus and taxis which will monitor the fleet of those services from a single center is planned.
A Method for Verifying the Applicability of Tramway Projects
2023, Public Works Management and PolicyScientific collaborations within urban areas: the case of İstanbul
2023, Review of Regional Research