Executive Summary

Executive Summary

There are a number of regulatory challenges that prevent Indian cities from having sustainable mobility services. Different aspects of urban mobility are governed by different agencies at the central, state and city level. The absence of an overarching legislative framework, along with multiple institutions with overlapping jurisdictions and lacking coordination leads to distortions in service provision, financing, implementation, and pricing of mobility.

A review of institutions, laws and policies at the centre, and in five cities- Pune, Mumbai, Bangalore, Panaji, Chandigarh led to the following findings: There are a number of laws at the centre and state related to vehicles, licensing, roads and railways. However, there are no laws that comprehensively cover urban mobility. As a result, there is no mandate to focus on meeting mobility demand through sustainable means, integrating mass transit and non-motorized transport. There have been policies that promote sustainable urban mobility, the most recent being the National Urban Transport Policy, 2014, which recommended the establishment of a city-based Unified Metropolitan Transport Authorities (UMTA). In Bangalore, UMTA has been set up under the State Department of Urban Land Transport but it is not clear yet as to whether it will be open to public participation, whether there will be a focus on non-motorized mobility and whether it will be able to work with planning agencies such as Bangalore Development Authority and Bangalore Metropolitan Region Development Authority.

Paris, London, Hong Kong and New Zealand all have urban transport agencies or regulators. Most of the cities had a single agency, empowered, locally governed and receiving Government funds. Some agencies acted as regulators, while simultaneously providing transport services. In most cases, the regulator was appointed by and reported to the local government. None of the cities had an independent statutory body set up to regulate mobility. Most of the agencies studied had legislative backing for their functioning. Transportation regulators and service providers had direct or indirect inputs into the planning and land use process. All the cities provided some form of subsidy or Viability Gap Funding to public transport operators. Tariffs were set mainly by adhering to a rule or formula related to inflation. Other means of tariff setting include public surveys, investigation or reports by a special committee.

The institutions, roles, power of the regulator, jurisdiction, consumer redressal and appellate process in other infrastructure sectors- power, telecom and ports can be used to provide inputs to the mobility sector. One potential regulatory reform is for states to pass a Sustainable Urban Mobility Law that includes a Sustainable Urban Mobility Policy that is to be updated regularly, an independent regulator at the city level and an institutional framework that calls for interaction between the regulator and urban planning agencies. In addition, the Government will need to set up a technical body, backed by law, to issue mandatory standards and conduct research on urban mobility in India. The law and the institutional set up need to be designed to ensure independence of the regulator, public participation, transparency, a dispute settlement mechanism and an appellate authority.