Response of Fuel Subsidy Removal as Sustainable Transport Policy (Case Study: Workers in Jakarta Metropolitan Area)

https://doi.org/10.22146/jcef.26580

Octaviani Ariyanti(1*), Samuel Petros Sebhatu(2)

(1) Ministry of Communication
(2) Karlstad Business School, Karlstad University, Karlstad
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract


Motorization in urban areas contributes several problems such as congestion, accidents, gas emissions, noises, and infrastructure breakage. Meanwhile, most of the developing countries cannot overcome such growth activities, as well as in Jakarta. By December 2013, Vice Governor of Jakarta proposes fuel subsidy removal policy as one of sustainable transport policy. This study is intended to understand and investigate how fuel subsidy removal policy scenarios (25%, 50%, and 100%) in Jakarta affects travelers’ behavior and analyze such policy to support sustainable transport by using qualitative research methodology. Interviews and questionnaires survey is conducted to workers in Jakarta, which includes ranking scale question for traveler response options. The result shows that half of the respondents are not affected and will only respond to fuel price increasing at IDR 31,400 for gasoline price and IDR 26,300 for ADO (Auto Diesel Oil). Moreover, there is a tendency of respondent's to the response by changing their travel mode choices into more fuel efficient private vehicle.


Keywords


sustainable transport, transport policy, fuel subsidy, removal, fuel policy

Full Text:

PDF


References

Anand, R. et al., 2013. The Fiscal and Welfare Impacts of Reforming Fuel Subsidies in India. International Monetary Fund, Issue 13.

Ariyanti, O., 2014. Responses Of Fuel Subsidy Removal As Sustainable Transport Policy, Yogyakarta: Master Thesis, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Universitas Gadjah Mada.

Banister, D., 2003. Sustainable Transport and Public Policy. Transportation Engineering Planning Encyclopaedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS).

Bomberg, M. & Kockelman, K. M., 2007. Traveler Response to the 2005 Gas Price Spike. Washington, DC.

BPH Migas, 2012. Pembatasan Konsumsi BBM Bersubsidi. [Online]
Available at: www.bphmigas.co.id
[Accessed 8 March 2014].

Buehler, R., 2010. Transport Policies, Automobile Use, and Sustainable Transport: a Comparison of Germany and the United States. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 30(1), pp. 76-93.

Burniaux, J. M. & Chateau, J., 2011. Mitigation Potential of Removing Fossil Fuel Subsidies: a General Equilibrium Assessment,  OECD Publishing.

Curtis, C., 2008. Planning for Sustainable Accessibility: The Implementation Challenge. Tranport Policy, 15(2), pp. 104-112.

Dargay, J., 2007. The effect of prices and income on car travel in the UK. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 41(10), pp. 949-960.

Goldman, T. & Gorham, R., 2006. Sustainable Urban Transport: Four Innovative Directions. Technology in Society, XXVIII(1), pp. 261-273.

Goodwin, P., Dargay, J. & Hanly, M., 2004. Elasticities of Road Traffic and Fuel Consumption with Respect to Price and Income: a Review. Transport Reviews, 24(3), pp. 275-292.

Graham, D. J. & Glaister, S., 2004. Road Traffic Demand Elasticity Estimates: A Review. Transport Reviews, 24(3), pp. 261-274.

IEA, 2013. Redrawing the Energy Climate Map World Energy Outlook Special Report.

Litman, T., 2007. Win-Win Transportation Emission Reduction Strategies. [Online]
Available at: www.vtpi.org/wwclimate.pdf

Litman, T., 2011. Changing Vehicle Travel Price Sensitivities: The Rebounding Rebound Effect. [Online]
Available at: www.vtpi.org/VMT_Elasticities.pdf

Litman, T. & Burwell, D., 2006. Issues in Sustainable Transportation. International Journal of Global Environmental Issues, 6(4), pp. 331-347.

Merrill, L., 2014. Reform of Fossil-fuel Subsidies: Nordic Cooperation on Fossil-fuel Subsidy Reform in Developing Countries: Assessing Options and Opportunities, Copenhagen.

Ministry of Finance, 2014. Financial Note and State Budget 2014. [Online]
Available at: http://www.anggaran.depkeu.go.id/dja/acontent/NK%202014.pdf

Nidumolu, R., Prahalad, C. K. & Rangaswami, M. R., 2009. Why Sustainability is Now the Key Driver of Innovatio.

Patton, M. Q., 1990. Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. 2nd Edition ed. Newbury Park, California: Sage Publications, Inc..

Robinson, B. W., Fleay, B. J. & Mayo, S. C., 2005. The Impact of Soil Depletion on Australi. pp. 19-20.

Sebhatu, S. P., Enquist, B., Johnson, M. & Gebauer, H., 2011. Sustainability and Innovating Value-Configuration Spaces for Innovative Public Transit Service.

Sterner, T., 2007. Fuel taxes: An important instrument for climate policy. Energy Policy, 35(6), pp. 3194-3202.

Suryanto, 2013. Ahok: subsidi BBM ibarat usus buntu. [Online]
Available at: http://www.antaranews.com/berita/410252/ahok-subsidi-bbm-ibarat-usus-buntu
[Accessed 8 March 2014].

Susantono, B., Santosa, W. & Budiyono, A., 2011. Kepemilikan Kendaraan dan Pola Perjalanan. Jurnal Transportasi, 11(3).

Susilo, Y. O., Joewono, T. B., Santosa, W. & Parikesit, D., 2007. A Reflection of Motorization and Public Transport in the Jakarta Metropolitan Area: Lessons Learned and Future Implications Towards Better Transportation Development in Developing Countries. Dalian, China, Eastern Asia Society of Transportation Studies, Eastern Asia Society of Transportation Studies.

Widodo, T., Sahadewo, G. A., Setiastuti, S. A. & Chaerriyah, M., 2012. Impact of Fuel Subsidy Removal on Government Spending.



DOI: https://doi.org/10.22146/jcef.26580

Article Metrics

Abstract views : 1141 | views : 1244

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Copyright (c) 2017 Journal of the Civil Engineering Forum


The content of this website is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
ISSN 5249-5925 (online) | ISSN 2581-1037 (print)
Jl. Grafika No.2 Kampus UGM, Yogyakarta 55281
Email : jcef.ft@ugm.ac.id
Web Analytics JCEF Stats