Transport practice and policy in Mauritius

Abstract

Like many developing nations over the last twenty years or so, the small, isolated, densely populated, developing Indian Ocean island of Mauritius has undergone––and continues to undergo––a revolution in the way its society lives and works. From a transport perspective, the case of Mauritius is interesting because it exhibits many of the transport problems faced in other countries, such as worsening congestion, air pollution and traffic accidents, but its transport planners have rather less time, experience and resources to develop a solution before the situation becomes critical, due to the faster pace of population, economic growth, and the lack of space. Further, while Mauritius is clearly a developing country, the future policy options currently being considered by the Government are perhaps better suited to a western developed nation than to a less capital intensive country.

This paper outlines the development of transport policy on the island to date, and suggests that Mauritius might look to models closer to home to see how to address its problems instead of looking to the West for its inspiration.

Introduction

Mauritius is perhaps best known as an exclusive winter holiday destination. Located some 800 km east of Madagascar, its maritime sub-tropical climate, volcanic mountains and extensive beaches make tourism its major industry. Besides tourism, sugar production and, less obviously, textiles are the main economic base (Mauritius (Republic), 1999a).

Mauritius was a British colony until 1968 and became a republic in 1992. It consists of a relatively small main island (58 km north to south by 47 km east to west), as well as the even smaller island of Rodrigues, 560 km to the north east, and various other scattered atolls. The main island has a high population density of 624 people per square kilometre.¹ This is set to rise further by a steadily growing population. In 2000–2001, the Mauritian population rose by 1.2% to 1,200,400 (Mauritius (Republic), 2001a). It is also a relatively urbanised population––although not to the same extent as Singapore, as any comparison should recognise. In mid-1998, 43.3% of people lived in the urban centres of Port Louis (147,131), the capital, and in the so-called ‘dormitory settlements’ or commuter towns of Beau Bassin-Rose Hill (100,616), Curepipe (79,614), Quatre Bornes (76,798) and Vacoas-Phoenix (98,464) (Europa, 2001) (see Fig. 1 for a map of Mauritius).

Overall, between 1996 and 2000, gross domestic product (GDP) grew at an average annual rate of 5.7%, but while this has led to some in the society becoming wealthier, many others have not. On average per capita GDP on an international purchasing parity basis for 2002 in Mauritius was $US10,400 (£6600) per head, which is almost the same as for Malaysia, Chile and Saudi Arabia. The comparable figure per capita in the UK was $US22,800 (£14,470) and that for Singapore $US26,500 (£16,830) (Geography IQ, 2002). Mauritius is thus like many developing countries, becoming increasingly populated, urbanised, and selectively wealthier.

As in most developing countries, the demand for transport in Mauritius has risen dramatically in recent years. This is due to a number of factors, including the steadily increasing population, an increase in household income for some sectors of the population, migration of the middle classes from rural to urban areas, urban sprawl, edge-of-town and out-of-town development, and greater participation of women in the labour force. There has also been an increase in commercial and industrial activity, partially caused by the Government’s efforts to decrease reliance on the sugar cane industry by diversifying into other economic areas (Seewoo, 1997; Mauritius (Republic), 2000b). Ultimately, the Mauritian Government sees itself as “taking its cue from the Singapore approach with its emphasis on a competitive regulatory framework and focus on technology support services in developing a conducive business environment” (World Bank, 1995). Mauritius is also seeking to develop as an off-shore financial centre, once again along the lines of Singapore.

Unfortunately, as yet one crucial area where Mauritius has failed to follow the Singapore model, has been in adopting policies to restrict traffic growth. For instance, in addition to high vehicle ownership and import taxes (as already found in Mauritius as we shall see), Singapore actually rations the number of vehicles that can be licensed in the country through a Vehicle Quota System, and controls vehicle use through a comprehensive Electronic Road Pricing scheme that covers the central business area as well as the most congested points on the island’s motorway network (Goh, 2002; Willoughby, 2001).

The result of Mauritius’ more relaxed approach to travel demand and of the high rate of economic growth, is that the number of registered vehicles is currently growing at 4.8% per annum and stood at nearly 250,000 in mid 2001. In the twelve-and-a-half years between from the end of 1988, the number of cars and dual purpose vehicles rose from 40,566 to 92,258 (127% increase), while the number of motorcycles increased from 39,093 to 118,483, (up 203%) (Mauritius (Republic), 1999b; Mauritius (Republic), 2001b)––a classic developing country characteristic. Interestingly though, unlike other developing countries Mauritius does not anymore have more than a small proportion of other unregulated vehicle types such as animal traction, truck passenger transport or tuk tuk motorcycle taxis for example. Compared with the African average of around 20 cars per thousand inhabitants, Mauritius, with 77 cars per thousand people is second only to South Africa in its level of car ownership (IRF, 1995). Table 1 compares vehicle ownership with a number of other countries. This is worrying, given that even now Singapore has only 102 cars per 1000 population while Mauritius is not far behind with 77 per 1000 inhabitants.

Vehicle use figures are more difficult to obtain. Baguant (1996) used tyre consumption data to estimate an average annual figure for 1992 of 16,000 km a year, and cited a study by university students who took odometer readings of 200 vehicles (all less that two years old) in 1993 which estimated a distance of 17,855 km.

Traffic and travel demand is rising considerably faster than road space. As a result, the 6.7% increase in the length of the road network, from 1783 km in 1986 to 1910 km in 1999 is dwarfed by the increase in traffic so that the vehicle density per kilometre increased from 40 to 104 in the 18 years to 1999. It is now by far the highest such figure in Africa (Mauritius (Republic), 1997; Seewoo, 1997; IRF, 1995; Europa, 2001). One salient comparison is that the vehicle density of Mauritius well exceeds Britains’ vehicle density which in 2000 was 73 vehicles per kilometre (Great Britain, 2001). Another is that the vehicle density for Singapore is 130 vehicles per kilometre (Geography IQ, 2002; SEDB, 2002).

Main roads and ‘motorways’ account for 50% of the network, secondary roads 33%, and other roads 17%, while the quality of road infrastructure now meets international standards after two national highway projects over the last decade.

Congestion is particularly bad during peak times on the Curepipe to Port Louis corridor, where journey times have increased by 40% over a 10-year period (Mauritius (Republic), 1998). This is particularly damaging for the 350 buses a day using the corridor. In Mauritius as a whole, worsening congestion was estimated to cost the Mauritian economy MRs200m (£8m) a year, or 0.5% of the Mauritian GDP in 1991² (Mauritius (Republic), 1997). By 2002, one estimated cost of congestion was MRs1.2bn (£30m) or almost 1.1% of GDP (Mauritius (Republic), 2002a; World Bank, 2002). Clearly, the situation is declining apace.

Despite, or maybe because of, the road improvements, the number of road traffic accidents significantly worsened, rising from 10,316 in 1990, to 18,278 in 2000, i.e. from 1007 accidents per 100,000 population to 1589. The number of traffic deaths ranged from 119 to 173 a year over the period, and the number of seriously injured fluctuated from 237 to 378 a year, with both trends remaining stable (Mauritius (Republic), 2002b). The fatality figures work out to be between 10 and 15 per 100,000 inhabitants. The equivalent figure for Singapore is 23, France is 21, while for Germany and the USA it is 16. The figures for India and China are eight and six respectively. If the numbers of fatalities per 10,000 vehicles are compared, the Mauritian figure of between six and eight is on a par with Poland and France (both 6), worse than developed nations such as Japan (2), Singapore and the USA (both 3), and Germany (4) but far better than other developing countries such as India (21), China (82) and Nigeria (141). In other words, Mauritius performs reasonably well in road safety terms, although road accidents are still estimated to cost the Mauritian economy MRs1.5bn (£37.5m) a year (Mauritius (Republic), 2002b; Vasconcellos, 2001; SEDB, 2002; SPF, 2002).

Further problems include worsening air pollution and carbon dioxide emissions (see Fig. 2).

Bus use has increased dramatically, and is expected to continue to do so. National Transport Authority (NTA) figures, quoted in Bhoyroo (1994) and Seewoo (1997), record that 174 million passenger journeys were made by bus in 1984, rising to 268 million in 1992, a 54% growth in eight years––broadly comparable to the growth in general traffic. This was expected to increase still further by 2000, but it is estimated that only 250 million passenger journeys were made in 2000, although this is difficult to verify.³ Assuming there were 250 million bus trips in 2000, then this equates to around 210 public transport trips per capita. White (2002) suggests that per capita public transport trip rates of between 100 and 400 are typical in cities throughout the developed world, although Hong Kong and Singapore exhibit rates of 500. In short, after a period of high growth, bus use has fallen while private car use continues to rise. The fall is despite the increase in the size of the bus fleet from 1664 vehicles in 1993 to 1777 vehicles in 2001.

This increase in bus use to 1992 occurred in spite of the apparent deterioration in service quality caused mainly by the rapid ageing of the bus fleet. Regulations now prohibit buses aged over 16 years from operating, such that the average age of vehicles in 2001 was around seven years.

Overall, the trends of private vehicle use increasing, buses getting older and patronage levels stagnating, if not in decline, very closely mirror the situation in the UK during the early 1990s––a far from ideal position. It is worth noting though that after 1993, investment in new buses began to increase and patronage stabilised.

No figures are available for trends of cycle use or pedestrian trips, but the lack of footways and the narrow and twisting roads combined with the sub-tropical climate make both modes relatively unattractive.

The organisation of transport in Mauritius is, as in many countries, institutionally complicated, especially when one considers that the entire population is less than for example, that of Tyneside or West Yorkshire. While responsibility for transport is largely overseen at a Government level by the Department of Land Transport, Shipping and Port Development, planning, policy making, investment, management, design, construction, regulation and enforcement functions are carried out by a myriad of agencies and organisations. These include the National Transport Authority, the Traffic Management Unit, Police Traffic Branch, Police Road Safety Unit, the Ministry of Public Infrastructure, and the technical division of the former Ministry of Works. In addition, at the local level nine district councils possess roughly similar powers to their British counterparts, with responsibilities for making planning decisions, and maintaining the smaller roads.

The organisational and regulatory structure of the public transport industry too, is currently rather ad hoc. This is largely due to historical reasons (see Henderson, Hughes and Busby, 1976; Commission of Inquiry of the Government of Mauritius, 1978; Bankur, 1990; Rowoteea, 1994; Bhoyroo, 1994). Essentially, prior to 1953, bus services were operated by small IOs, but were then advised by the Transport Control Board to form bus companies. However, with the increase in demand for transport during the 1970s, coupled with growing industrial unrest, these bus companies were unable to cope, and so in 1978 the Government again awarded licenses to individual operators. In April 1979 the National Transport Corporation (NTC) was created. This Government-owned bus company was to have begun operating new vehicles in April 1980 to help ease the lack of public transport. But, after a series of strikes in August 1979 forced a number of bus companies to close, the situation meant that one of these was effectively taken over by the NTC, which then began operating in March 1980.

As a result, buses in Mauritius are run by a mixture of the para-statal NTC, private companies, and by a growing number of IOs, encouraged to participate by the Government (see Table 2). Fares for all buses in Mauritius are set by the Transport Tariff Committee. As of the end of 2001, fares range from MRs4 to MRs20 (£0.10 to £0.50) per trip.

Buses in Mauritius are given exclusive franchises to operate along set routes through licenses issued by the NTC. However, in practice the IOs in particular often operate more as dolmuses or jitneys than conventional buses. It is certainly true that buses leaving Port Louis in the evening peak wait until they are full before leaving. Uneconomic trips are not performed or cut short, excess passengers are carried, running times are not observed resulting in long trip times, and buses wait for longer than scheduled at bus stops. Interestingly, similar characteristics were observed following bus ‘deregulation’ in Britain, most tellingly in Darlington, County Durham during the early 1990s (Enoch, 1997). In addition, so-called contract buses exist, which are licensed specifically to transport employees and/or tourists.

The larger bus companies do not tend to experience reliability difficulties. But, the operating costs of these operators is almost twice as high as for the IOs. This is because under an Industrial Relations Act, bus companies must employ seven conductors and seven drivers for every five buses, and must provide benefits such as pensions, holiday and sick pay. Worse for the operators, is the regulation requiring that buses must be de-licensed after 16 years. This means that they can only use these vehicles for spare parts rather than sell on their buses to IOs as occurred before. As a result, the bus companies claim to be continually losing money, although as yet there is no operational subsidy provided by the Government.

With the problems of the bus industry, and the rise in general prosperity, taxis are also a popular means of transport––especially for important trips. Broadly there are three types of service––hire per trip, contract cars––often hired by tourists for a daily rate––and ‘taxi-train’. Taxi trains are shared taxis that are licensed to operate along a set route as a supplementary bus. They are able to stop and pick up passengers along that route and charge separate fares of each passenger. Taxi-trains were first permitted under, section 103 of the Road Traffic Act 1962. Initially they were unable to collect passengers within 60 m of a bus stop. But the public transport situation became so chaotic during the mid-1970s (with many passengers waiting for long periods for a bus) that the 60-m rule was rescinded. Interestingly, the separate fares charged are set at the same level as for a bus operating the same route––despite the rather quicker and more comfortable ride offered by the taxi-train. Understandably, there are many people who prefer to wait for a taxi-train, even if a bus to the same destination arrives in the meantime. Taxi drivers are not provided with any subsidies to operate as a taxi-train. However, they are offered an 80% rebate by customs and excise on the purchase taxes of their vehicles––a substantial incentive given that this can be set as high as 200% of the value of the vehicle––and pay only half the annual road tax. Overall, it is not known how many or what type of trips are made using taxi-trains in Mauritius, or what type of people are using the mode. Altogether around 5300 taxis are registered by the NTA. In addition there are a significant proportion of unlicensed taxis ‘taxi marons’ in operation. Such a sizeable taxi fleet may partly explain why bus use is falling rather than rising as expected.

Rail-based public transport––which disappeared with the closure of the Curepipe to Port Louis service in 1964––could be in the process of making a comeback in the form of LRT, serving the same corridor. As of January 2002, the Government was in the process of evaluating three ‘Alternative Mode of Transport’ options––light rail, guided bus, or a ‘closed’ unguided bus system, and is considering wider implementation issues in a series of working groups.

Fiscal policy has so far focused entirely on purchasing and owning vehicles, rather than on using them. Prospective motorists must pay a purchase tax of a given percentage of the value of the vehicle (see Table 3, Table 4), plus 12% VAT. In addition, there is a registration fee of MRs2500 (£100) for vehicles less than 1600cc and MRs5000 (£200) for cars over 1600cc, and a nominal annual licence fee or road tax of MRs50 (£1.25) to pay (IRF, 2001). There are reductions in duty for civil servants, taxis, etc. As yet, there is no duty on petrol or any other form of use tax, although the NTA is currently studying the feasibility of replacing the road tax with a petrol tax.