Harvey Scorcia
Ejecutivo Principal en transporte de CAF -banco de desarrollo de América Latina
We recently completed a study, in collaboration with the firm Steer, whose objective was to propose improvements to the User Information System (UIS) of the Panama City bus system (Mibus). At the beginning of the study, we did not imagine the challenges that we would identify during the diagnostic stage, which had a focus on gender, inclusion of people with disabilities, and diversity (GID). The study was contracted as a result of a conversation between Mibus and CAF about the need to improve signage, and to make it easier for local citizens (and foreigners) to use the bus system and its connections with the metro system.
In order to prepare the SIU diagnosis, and to address the GID approach, we conducted, among other things, an analysis based on the experience of the people who use the system. For this purpose, we formed focus groups, observed people's behavior in the interchange areas between the bus and the subway, and conducted accompanied tours.
The focus groups included: people with intellectual, physical, and sensory disabilities; elderly people; people belonging to different ethnic groups; rural population; migrant population; tourists; caregivers; women; LGBTIQA+ population; and minors. The analysis included the review of their experiences throughout all stages of their trips (trip planning, ticket purchase, waiting and boarding the buses, etc.) as presented in the following table.
The exercise results left the team astonished at the complexities faced by different segments of the population, which are not actively considered during the planning, construction, and management of transportation systems. Some findings are not novel, especially regarding gender issues, as various studies in recent years have been gathering evidence of the problem. Despite this, comprehensive solutions to the challenges have not yet been implemented. For example, women, who are most affected by situations of violence in public spaces, place high importance on the presence of safe spaces in their mobility. Therefore, they plan the use of routes, schedules, and paths where there is a greater perception of security. Due to their roles in unpaid domestic work and caregiving, women make chained trips (with multiple stops) that require transfers. Thus, the system should offer a fare policy that allows for transfers. Similarly, having and knowing about spaces in the system for breastfeeding would make a difference for many mothers. Finally, something that caught the team's attention was the taboo surrounding the issue of sexual harassment. The topic did not come up spontaneously in the interviews and had to be directly asked about, providing a definition of what sexual harassment was with examples. Once the situations were recognized, there was a lengthy anecdotal record of this phenomenon on public transportation.
Other findings and challenges identified, which now seem obvious to us, were not on our radar. For example: (i) the limitations and difficulties faced by people with disabilities in obtaining basic information about the system; (ii) the inability of deaf people to interact with officials at ticket counters; (iii) the lack of a way to identify stops and paid areas in sign language; (iv) the importance of travel validation machines being adapted for deaf individuals (with some light) and blind individuals (with some sound) indicating that the transaction has been accepted; (v) the difficulties a deaf person faces when a bus bell doesn't work, or the limitations a blind person faces inside the bus when they don't hear which stop the bus is approaching; (vi) the difficulties older people face with technological issues, such as recharging their cards; (vii) the complexities faced by blind and mobility-impaired individuals in navigating city streets and subsequently boarding (and alighting) buses. Although buses are designed with platforms and ramps, this is not a guarantee that they will function. Furthermore, drivers are not proficient in the knowledge and handling of the various types of wheelchairs available; and (viii) finally, and not to dwell on the countless challenges, I highlight the tacit and explicit bullying to which different people are exposed daily. For example, the rejection or indifference to allowing and/or supporting overweight individuals who use wheelchairs to access buses; or the attitude and comments towards indigenous women and the LGBTIQA+ population for their way of dressing.
Given all this evidence, it is clear that the challenges are not only in the IUS, but also in other areas such as infrastructure, technical and institutional capacity, and regulation (with gaps and duplication of responsibility among institutions). The complexity and immensity of the challenge should not be an excuse for doing nothing. In fact, there are many low-cost, high-impact actions in which progress can be made. Some of them are: (i) the creation of signage with accessible versions (Braille plaques, sign language videos for display, haptic maps, and auditory signals); (ii) improvements in public transport environments with a focus on universal accessibility infrastructure; (iii) design of the asset management system and maintenance plan and improvement of signals; (iv) strategies for campaigns against sexual harassment in the system and reporting protocols; (v) strategies against discrimination; and (vii) compliance with universal accessibility standards in the purchase of future fleet.
I close by thanking Mibus for the opportunity and openness they had with CAF. We hope to continue working in the region to implement actions that meet the mobility needs of the entire population, incorporating the gender perspective, inclusion of people with disabilities and diversity.
